Sentences with phrase «radiative balance state»
I think a better definition of climate change would be a recognizable radiative balance state change that appears immune to short term cycles like ENSO and seasonal cycles.
http://www.realclimate.org/ Not exact matches
In the main article you state «the fact that the energy balance model used by Schmittner et al can not compute cloud radiative forcing is particularly serious.»
How about this: if I could point to a state change in the radiative balance of the earth that started 6 years ago, would you say unless that state change lasts 24 more years it's not climate change?
(57k) When I state that the equilibrium climatic response must balance imposed RF (and feedbacks that occur), I am referring to a global time average RF and global time average response (in terms of radiative and convective fluxes), on a time scale sufficient to characterize the climatic state (including cycles driven by externally - forced cycles (diurnal, annual) and internal variability.
Under steady - state conditions, the total radiation absorbed by the Earth must match the total radiation emitted by the Earth; that's what radiative balance or imbalance means in the climate literature.
It clearly states that (a) emission of energy by radiation is accompanied with cooling of the surface (if no compensating changes prevent it), and (b) the tendency to a radiative equilibrium means that the emitter with the higher surface temperature will loose energy due to a negative net radiation balance until this net radiation balance becomes zero.
He does not look at the top of atmosphere balance to see how it remains unbalanced under his modified state, so he hasn't looked at radiative equilibrium, but some kind of transient response, as far as I can tell.
And thus, all attempts at carefully accounting for the radiative balance by stating that the shell is twice the area of the planet are nonsensical, because it doesn't have to be twice the area...
And thus, all attempts at carefully accounting for the radiative balance by stating that the shell is twice the area of the planet are nonsensical, because it doesn't have to be twice the area... it could easily be much more without changing the basic premise of the model.
Over this five year time span, the latest observations appear to show that the top of the atmosphere has been in an averaged state of radiative balance.