Sentences with phrase «outgoing ir»

With more CO2, the effective «Top of Atmosphere» will be higher, which means cooler, which means less outgoing IR.

Trapping outgoing IR is only a fraction of the heat that would be required to warm the oceans.

I think that the second of the points I made about affects of additional CO2 is the way to present «the greenhouse effect» («With more CO2, the effective «Top of Atmosphere» will be higher, which means cooler, which means less outgoing IR.

But just as the upper atmosphere is largely tansmissive to outgoing IR, it is also transmissive to incoming IR.

Has anyone ever looked for evidence of stimulated emission of outgoing IR in the atmosphere?

IF there were any significant amount of stimulated emission happening in the atmosphere then the basic 1/2 back down calculation would likely be wrong because most of the IR through the atmosphere comes from the ground up and, if it is stimulating atmospheric emission, would enhance outgoing IR.

That is, as the average temperature in - creases cloud cover decreases so that more solar energy reaches and is absorbed by the Earth's surface, which is partially offset by increased outgoing IR radiation.

It should be measureable but, like the outgoing IR measurements, if such a change had indeed taken place I think we would have heard about it by now.

At the very least the variation of outgoing IR on a month to month basis is huge compared with the small linear decrease that the CO2 increase should generate.

Outgoing IR increased between the 1980's and 1990's.

The second plot shows the spatial correlation between the TOA outgoing IR radiation and the temperature 2m above the surface.

The overall effect of the cloudiness on the earth is a cooling effect but there is enough warming due to the decrease in outgoing IR radiation that it offset a considerable fraction of the cooling effect due to the increase in albedo alone.

The wavelength of some of the IR radiation involving absorption and emission of those gases overlaps with incoming IR in the SSI and with earth emitted outgoing IR.»

If it weren't for the atmospheric window emitting at higher intensity, this emitting layer would reach the snowball earth temp of about 255K, at which the outgoing IR balances incoming sun light.

And, even this number is in some sense deceiving because increasing clouds actually has two effects: a cooling effect due to the increase in albedo and a warming effect due to a decrease in the outgoing IR («longwave») radiation.

The wavelength of some of the IR radiation involved in absorption and emission with those gases overlaps with incoming IR in the SSI and with earth emitted outgoing IR.»

Pekka Pirila writes «- The IR absorption due to CO2 in air has been measured accurately and in great detail in laboratory — The downwelling radiation has been measured in many locations with variable accuracy and number of details — The outgoing IR radiation at the top of atmosphere has been measured as a function of the wavelength»

This is largely zero - sum in terms of heat content except for the fact that warmer surfaces will radiate more strongly according to Plank's law, so that the total heat will decrease with El Ninos (greater outgoing IR).

Be careful, the incoming infrared radiation of the sun and the outgoing IR radiation of the earth are quite different in wavelengths.

If GHGs block / capture some outgoing IR, they must surely do the same with incoming IR (which constitutes nearly 50 % of solar radiation in energy terms as I recall).

Any volume of gases with incoming IR can not be in LTE unless precisely matched with outgoing LTE, and since the the missing N2 - N2 collisions (and O2 of course) will prevent much of the outgoing IR from existing, the gas in not in LTE.

That being said, the actual measurements of outgoing IR seem much more variable, with no clear trend, making one wonder if CO2 is just not significant compared to other factors governing energy loss to space:

Ozone in the troposphere absorbs outgoing IR radiation.

The atmosphere is presumably transparent to the latter two, but incoming IR (and nearIR) is presumably partially absorbed by GHGs in the atmosphere, and so heat it, exactly as outgoing IR heats the GHGs in the atmosphere.

How many times do you (Myrrh) need to gave it explained: it is not necessary for visible light to warm the earth, for it to result in outgoing IR.

Memphis October 28, 2012 at 2:53 am How many times do you (Myrrh) need to gave it explained: it is not necessary for visible light to warm the earth, for it to result in outgoing IR.

But to make some sense of your longer distance, I suppose that little bits of C02, warmed by absorbing outgoing IR, thermalize that energy to adjacent atoms, then rise to get the longer distance.

The 15 % of outgoing IR in the «holes» in the outgoing absorption goes out and the surface layer of the atmosphere and the surface play handball with the rest of the IR radiation.

You could falsify the science by going to the TOA measuring outgoing IR.

Yes, CO2 has exactly the same effect on incoming or outgoing IR, but the vast majority of enrgy incoming from the sun is in non-IR frequencies and outgoing is in the IR.

CO2 reduces outgoing IR, what happens next according to this idea?

An immediate effect of added CO2 is a reduction in outgoing IR at TOA.

LOL — Your claims global brightening from reduced cloud cover is a climate forcing without considering the effect of such cloud cover changes on outgoing IR.

You also make the mistake of assuming all the outgoing IR is absorbed and re radiated but obviously a lot gets through unimpeded as the atmosphere thins.

(Starting from a base case, record the total outgoing IR flux.

And models don't reflect SST / outgoing IR / cloud cover variations over the last decades, even not over the 60N - 60S latitude band (leaving not much area to be checked...).

Outgoing IR increases with temperature.

[Response: I have an on - line simulator of IR in the air, showing a spectrum of the outgoing IR to space, that I use for teaching and my textbook.

This takes a big bite out of the outgoing IR spectrum and throws the system out of equilibrium.

While an increase in the amount of radiation the Earth receives by trapping outgoing IR would increase surface temps, would the increased surface temp not increase the convection and evaporation rates introducing a negative feedback?

Not exact matches

The imbalance is not between IR absorbed and IR emitted by a layer of atmosphere, but between the incoming shortwave solar energy from space and the outgoing longwave energy emitted to space, due to the increasing difference between the ground temperature and the temperature of the level from which re-emitted radiation can escape to space.

The resulting extra increased upper tropospheric moisture is assumed to block large amounts of additional outgoing infrared (IR) radiation to space beyond the blockage of CO2 by itself.

In your response, if any, you should probably incorporate references to the measured IR absorption spectrum of CO2, the measured spectrum of the sun as seen at the top of atmosphere, the measured outgoing spectrum of earth, and some sign that you understand that a change in temperature is the net effect of ALL energy flows (large or small).

At specific IR frequencies greenhouse gases resonate with outgoing photons resulting in vibrations, rotations, translations and electron orbit excitations.

The IR spectra show that part of the outgoing nozzle is partially blocked, radiating a lot less power than the surface temperature would by itself be expected to radiate.

The solar incoming side of things doesn't change with adding CO2, but the IR outgoing part sure does, which is the whole point.

Until this AGW magic illusion is seen through, it will continue to confuse energies and confuse the two aspects needed to understand the outgoing Thermal IR of the cartoon.

So, if we seek a minimum temperature that earth holds without IR absorbing gases we need to count back radiation of absorbed sunlight, 39 W / sqm, 161 W / sqm absorbed sunlight + 38 % reflection of outgoing radiation we get 322 W / sqm or 0 deg celsius at surface.

Secondly, the Solar energy which the cartoon claims converts to heat to produce this outgoing Thermal IR is composed of UV, Visible and Near IR, none of which are actual thermal IR, heat on the move, we can not feel them, and there is no attempt made to prove that these energies convert to enough heat of land and sea to raise the temperature of the Earth.

A measured reduction in the amount of outgoing longwave (IR) radiation.