Sentences with phrase «on atmospheric heat»

Therefore, the strongest motivation for the current scientific review is the need for a synoptic organization of the available knowledge on the field of interactions at different planetary systems, in parallel with a comparative analysis encompassing the inter-connection among planetary space weather aspects belonging to different disciplines (e.g. plasma variability and its effects on atmospheric heating).

There are a number of man - made contributory factors that may have had specific impacts on the atmospheric heating, e.g. local warming in the cities (due to housing, roads, and other resultant factors), smoke and dust over long distances or deforestation of huge forest areas.

Not exact matches

Increased atmospheric heat obviously makes temperatures warmer, which leaves less time for ice to form and solidify and create new layers on glaciers and ice sheets.

Sweltering summertime heat waves are on the rise across the Northern Hemisphere because of atmospheric changes brought on by Arctic warming, new research shows.

On a global scale, the heating of atmospheric molecules causes the lower atmosphere, or troposphere, to expand and stretch higher during the day; it then settles back down as it cools at night.

The best way to explain this spike is from the swirling maelstrom below, where turbulent atmospheric waves must generate heat by crashing together like breakers on a windy beach shore.

Scientists believe that dust has profound and somewhat mysterious influences on atmospheric chemistry, solar heat exchange and nutrient supply to the oceans and rain forests.

«But on top of that, changes in atmospheric circulation can favor particular weather conditions associated with heat waves.»

Francesco Panerai of Analytical Mechanical Associates Inc., a materials scientist leading a series of X-ray experiments at Berkeley Lab for NASA Ames Research Center, discusses a 3 - D visualization (shown on screens) of a heat shield material's microscopic structure in simulated spacecraft atmospheric entry conditions.

Scientists at the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) and NASA are using X-rays to explore, via 3 - D visualizations, how the microscopic structures of spacecraft heat shield and parachute materials survive extreme temperatures and pressures, including simulated atmospheric entry conditions on Mars.

Sulphur particles in the stratosphere reflect sunlight and therefore act antagonistically to atmospheric greenhouse gases like CO2, which capture the heat of the sun on Earth.

As a result of atmospheric patterns that both warmed the air and reduced cloud cover as well as increased residual heat in newly exposed ocean waters, such melting helped open the fabled Northwest Passage for the first time [see photo] this summer and presaged tough times for polar bears and other Arctic animals that rely on sea ice to survive, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

I am excited about our results because they open a new window on very fundamental processes in brown dwarfs (atmospheric circulation, heat exchanges, and cloud formation) and, at the same time, they also explain a number of past observations that puzzled brown dwarf experts.

For example, in Earth atmospheric circulation (such as Hadley cells) transport heat between the warmer equatorial regions to the cool polar regions and this circulation pattern not only determines the temperature distribution, but also sets which regions on Earth are dry or rainy and how clouds form over the planet.

Scientists at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory showed that global climate models are not accurately depicting the true depth and strength of tropical clouds that have a strong hold on the general circulation of atmospheric heat and the global water balance.

It will also increase vital heat transfer about the planet too, helping resist atmospheric collapse likely on the permanently cold night side of any synchronous planet.

The ocean heat content change is from this section and Levitus et al. (2005c); glaciers, ice caps and Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets from Chapter 4; continental heat content from Beltrami et al. (2002); atmospheric energy content based on Trenberth et al. (2001); and arctic sea ice release from Hilmer and Lemke (2000).

ICARUS is gathering data on surface radiation, heat fluxes, and vertical profiles of the basic atmospheric state (temperature, humidity, and horizontal wind), as well as turbulence, aerosol properties, and cloud properties.

The ability of a large moon such as Titan to subsequently retain a substantial atmosphere for billions of years depends on a delicate balance between surface gravity, atmospheric molecular mass, and solar heating.

A continual cycle of heat and moisture is pulled from the tropical ocean and transported around the globe on belts of atmospheric energy.

If more heat is transferred to the oceans than is accounted for by the models, that «is a negative atmospheric feedback, at least on shorter time scales.»

Since then, anthropogenic influence has also been identified in a range of other climate variables, such as ocean heat content, atmospheric pressure and sea ice extent, thereby contributing further evidence of an anthropogenic influence on climate, and improving confidence in climate models.

We continue to «discover» vast, active volcanoes in the deep oceans, could they not have an impact on ocean heat content and via that the atmospheric heat content?

The whole issue is that any level above what is often called the «effective radiating level» (say, at ~ 255 K on Earth) should start to cool as atmospheric CO2 increases, since the layers above this height are being shielded more strongly from upwelling radiation... except not quite, because convection distributes heating higher than this level, the stratosphere marks the point where convection gives out and there is high static stability.

Because the drains out of the various bathtubs involved in the climate — atmospheric concentrations, the heat balance of the surface and oceans, ice sheet accumulations, and thermal expansion of the oceans — are small and slow, the emissions we generate in the next few decades will lead to changes that, on any time scale we can contemplate, are irreversible.

The vast majority of research in recent decades on the carbon dioxide buildup has been focused on the atmospheric impacts of the accumulating greenhouse - gas blanket even though the vast majority of the heated trapped by these gases has gone first into the seas — and the drop in seawater pH driven by CO2 has been a clear signal of substantial environmental change.

This would have an effect on both atmospheric and ocean circulation and heat balance that would have to be modeled by detailed ocean / atmospheric climate modeling.

There is nowhere in that paper, or any other, that relies on some assumption about atmospheric heat content anomalies.

This is not the case with surface - to - air heat exchange (which involves evapo - transpiration, sensible heat flows, and radiation) or even within the troposphere where impacts of latent heating on atmospheric circulations are realized on scales ranging from hundreds of meters to thousands of kilometers.

In the case where there is a skin temperature that only depends on solar heating of the planet with no solar heating above the troposphere, an increase in GHG forcing would still result in upper atmospheric cooling, but this cooling would only be transient.

In the same tone as the last post regarding atmospheric contaminants, have to wonder whether an era of widespread constant combustion across the globe, and all the waste heat from that combustion, would have any effect on the global mean temperature.

In 1896 Swedish chemist and Nobel laureate Svante Arrhenius used Langley's bolometer to measure the heat from the Moon at various altitudes above the horizon in order to estimate the dependence of atmospheric heat trapping on amount of water vapor and CO2 along the line of sight to the Moon, a much longer path near the horizon than at 45 degrees.

Thanks — but your comment about SE Australia conflicts with your previous comment on atmospheric circulation, as such a small area is unlikely to have a meaningful relationship between heat and rain however statistically significant your negative correlation may be (what is the t?).

Contrary to your impression, incoming radiation contributes significantly to atmospheric heating, but less on a proportional basis than outgoing radiation.

incoming radiation contributes significantly to atmospheric heating, but less on a proportional basis than outgoing radiation

The convective heat / mass transfer due to water dwarfs any radiative forcing; besides — just on optical depth alone, any re-radiated LWIR from atmospheric CO2 would be IMMEDIATELY absorbed by the much higher concentration of water vapor in the atmosphere (aka clouds!)

So if there were, say, a decadal - scale 1 % -2 % reduction in cloud cover that allowed more SW radiation to penetrate into the ocean (as has been observed since the 1980s), do you think this would have an impact of greater magnitude on the heat in the oceans than a change of, say, +10 ppm (0.00001) in the atmospheric CO2 concentration?

Atmospheric crude oil distillation: The refining process of separating crude oil components at atmospheric pressure by heating to temperatures of about 600 degrees to 750 degrees Fahrenheit (depending on the nature of the crude oil and desired products) and subsequent condensing of the fractions by cooling.

John Carter August 8, 2014 at 12:58 am chooses to state his position on the greenhouse effect in the following 134 word sentence: «But given the [1] basics of the greenhouse effect, the fact that with just a very small percentage of greenhouse gas molecules in the air this effect keeps the earth about 55 - 60 degrees warmer than it would otherwise be, and the fact that through easily recognizable if [2] inadvertent growing patterns we have at this point probably at least [3] doubled the total collective amount in heat absorption and re-radiation capacity of long lived atmospheric greenhouse gases (nearly doubling total that of the [4] leading one, carbon dioxide, in the modern era), to [5] levels not collectively seen on earth in several million years — levels that well predated the present ice age and extensive earth surface ice conditions — it goes [6] against basic physics and basic geologic science to not be «predisposed» to the idea that this would ultimately impact climate.»

Many experts on the Arctic say that global warming is causing the ice to melt and that the warming is at least partly the result of the atmospheric buildup of heat - trapping gases from tailpipes and smokestacks.

I'm a phsycist - and I remember being highly skeptical about AGW when I first heard about it in the late 80's - reasoning that the ocean was such an enormous heat sink that any impact on atmospheric temperatures would be dwarfed by the impact on increased heat content in the ocean.

One of the top three strongest events on record, this particular warming of sea surfaces in the Pacific coincided with never before seen global heat as atmospheric CO2 levels spiked to above 405 parts per million on some days during February and March.

Climate change may also augment or intensify other stresses on vegetation encountered in urban environments, including increased atmospheric pollution, heat island effects, a highly variable water cycle, and frequent exposure to new pests and diseases.

The amount of future warming will depend on changes in the atmospheric concentration of heat - trapping gases.

One of the major areas, well covered in other posts on Climate Etc., involve the very skimpy knowledge - base on the relationship between atmospheric heating («forcing») and cloud albedo.

Romanski, J., and S. Hameed, 2015: The impact of trends in the large scale atmospheric circulation on Mediterranean surface turbulent heat fluxes.

You can see in section four and related figures that the progression continues, next including the Pacific and ice in the East Eurasian Arctic in stage three, and then anomaly trends come to a close in stage four, with cumulative effects on ice, heat flux, atmospheric response, etc..

The formula is based on known ideas due to Arrhenius in 1896 and Hofmann in 2009 (that the portion of atmospheric CO2 above the preindustrial level is growing exponentially), with the added twist that the oceanic heat sink delays the impact of radiative forcing variations on HadCRUT3 by 15 years, analogously to the overheating of a CPU being delayed by the addition of a heatsink with no fan, what I refer to as the Hansen delay.

«because T&G failed to demonstrate that the pot on the stove example is a valid analogy for the earth, they failed to falsify the atmospheric greenhouse effect» G and T, as they are more commonly known, make the obvious point that a (massive) increase in energy absorption will cool the pot, not heat it.

How hurricanes develop also depends on how the local atmosphere responds to changes in local sea surface temperatures, and this atmospheric response depends critically on the cause of the change.23, 24 For example, the atmosphere responds differently when local sea surface temperatures increase due to a local decrease of particulate pollution that allows more sunlight through to warm the ocean, versus when sea surface temperatures increase more uniformly around the world due to increased amounts of human - caused heat - trapping gases.25, 26,27,28