28, Alastair McDonald: Increased CO2 does not warm the atmosphere, it melts the snow and ice
reducing global albedo, and that causes AGW.
Increased CO2 does not warm the atmosphere, it melts the snow and ice
reducing global albedo, and that causes AGW.
In the real world the most obvious and most common reason for an increase in the speed of energy flow through the system occurs naturally when the oceans are in warm surface mode and solar input to the oceans due to
reduced global albedo is high as apparently occurred during the period 1975 to 1998.
Not exact matches
Critics argue that
albedo modification and other «geoengineering» schemes are risky and would discourage nations from trying to
reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide, the heat - trapping gas that comes from the burning of fossil fuels and that is causing
global warming by absorbing increasing amounts of energy from sunlight.
[1] CO2 absorbs IR, is the main GHG, human emissions are increasing its concentration in the atmosphere, raising temperatures globally; the second GHG, water vapor, exists in equilibrium with water / ice, would precipitate out if not for the CO2, so acts as a feedback; since the oceans cover so much of the planet, water is a large positive feedback; melting snow and ice as the atmosphere warms decreases
albedo, another positive feedback, biased toward the poles, which gives larger polar warming than the
global average; decreasing the temperature gradient from the equator to the poles is
reducing the driving forces for the jetstream; the jetstream's meanders are increasing in amplitude and slowing, just like the lower Missippi River where its driving gradient decreases; the larger slower meanders increase the amplitude and duration of blocking highs, increasing drought and extreme temperatures — and 30,000 + Europeans and 5,000 plus Russians die, and the US corn crop, Russian wheat crop, and Aussie wildland fire protection fails — or extreme rainfall floods the US, France, Pakistan, Thailand (driving up prices for disk drives — hows that for unexpected adverse impacts from AGW?)
«Our results suggest that, in contrast to other proposals to increase planetary
albedo, offsetting mean
global warming by
reducing marine cloud droplet size does not necessarily lead to a drying, on average, of the continents.
Re 9 wili — I know of a paper suggesting, as I recall, that enhanced «backradiation» (downward radiation reaching the surface emitted by the air / clouds) contributed more to Arctic amplification specifically in the cold part of the year (just to be clear, backradiation should generally increase with any warming (aside from greenhouse feedbacks) and more so with a warming due to an increase in the greenhouse effect (including feedbacks like water vapor and, if positive, clouds, though regional changes in water vapor and clouds can go against the
global trend); otherwise it was always my understanding that the
albedo feedback was key (while sea ice decreases so far have been more a summer phenomenon (when it would be warmer to begin with), the heat capacity of the sea prevents much temperature response, but there is a greater build up of heat from the
albedo feedback, and this is released in the cold part of the year when ice forms later or would have formed or would have been thicker; the seasonal effect of
reduced winter snow cover decreasing at those latitudes which still recieve sunlight in the winter would not be so delayed).
If part of the result of increased GHG's is increased cloudiness, leading to a higher SW
albedo, then the overall
global temperature need not increase, because the amount of energy actually entering the system has been
reduced.
Finally, while economics may be critical to your definition of «catastrophic» anthropogenic
global warming, economics says nothing about the science underlying the projections of sea level rise, the physics of Arctic amplification, changes to
albedo that lead to greater warming that may lead to significant releases of methane clathrate deposits, regional projections of
reduce (or enhanced) precipitation, and so on.
A slight change of ocean temperature (after a delay caused by the high specific heat of water, the annual mixing of thermocline waters with deeper waters in storms) ensures that rising CO2
reduces infrared absorbing H2O vapour while slightly increasing cloud cover (thus Earth's
albedo), as evidenced by the fact that the NOAA data from 1948 - 2008 shows a fall in
global humidity (not the positive feedback rise presumed by NASA's models!)
The step up in the
global temperature anomaly at circa 2000, about 0.3 °C, has been shown as a result in
reduced cloud
albedo.
That is because the advance of boreal forests, which have begun to supplant the region's tundras, threatens to accelerate the impact of
global warming by
reducing the region's
albedo effect.
Obviously, we are currently in transition and our
global atmospheric cell structures are going to shift rapidly with broadly expanding Hadley cell and collapsing Arctic cell leading to meridional migration of average cloud cover and
reduced albedo.
This suggests that the
global annual average single scattering
albedo of the aerosols has been
reduced because of human activity.