Sentences with phrase «slows heat loss»

Just guessing here, but I think the above response in the comments for the RC article by Minnett discusses where Rob Painting thinks Aaron Lewis is misunderstanding the skin layer and how the enhanced GHE slows heat loss from the oceans, which, obviously, results in increased OHC.

If on the other hand you mean that the GHGs act like insulation which slows the heat loss from the surface, I would have to think about that, but can't at this point disagree that it is possible.

When the Arctic freezes over the ice insulates the sea and slows the heat loss from the N pole, when the Arctic ocean has less ice then more heat radiates off to space.

Just as there is no «33 °C warming by greenhouse gases from the minus 18 °C it would be without them» — when the real blanket which slows heat loss is reinstated — the heavy voluminous fluid ocean atmosphere of real gas, mainly nitrogen and oxygen, and when the Water Cycle is reinstated.

Nice misconception you have going there but the real argument is that CO2 can lower the temperature gradient of the cool skin layer, which slows the heat loss to the atmosphere and increased levels of greenhouse gases lead to more heat being stored in the oceans over the long - term.

If the bucket were dragged at sampling depth for a few minutes before extraction, the walls of the bucket would have come near the ambient water temperature, slowing heat loss from the captured water.

No it doesn't, because immediately the cold blanket will take heat from you, it can slow your heat loss and act to delay conduction of your body's heat to the cold air around you, which is why you feel cold in the first place, and depending on how cold the air and how effective the blanket, you will hopefully regain your body's working temperature, and if very efficient, could make you overheat.

Half of the heat that is lost from the inner chamber to the shell is radiated back inward, keeping the contents warm and slowing heat loss.

It seems to me that so far, having determined that radiative energy can slow the heat loss from the surface, the questions which remain unresolved are:

I doubt that many people would challenge the assertion that the warmer the atmosphere, the slower the heat loss from the surface of the Earth.

That the radiated energy of cold ice contributes to slowing heat loss from a person is not disputed.

Not exact matches

The softer reading, especially slower export orders, adds to concerns about an expected loss of momentum in the world's second - largest economy, as policymakers navigate debt risks and a heated trade row with the U.S.

Vitamin C, vitamin B6, and carotenoids are good examples of nutrients highly susceptible to heat, and for this reason, their loss from food is very likely to be slowed down through refrigeration.

After 24 hours of sleep deprivation, normal flies reacted slower to heat in their cages, but the mutants reacted as if they were fully rested, indicating that they didn't need to make up for their slumber loss.

Vitamin C, vitamin B6, and carotenoids are good examples of nutrients highly susceptible to heat, and for this reason, their loss from food is very likely to be slowed down through refrigeration.

Freeze, Heat and Fry Box Set (5 in 1) Cast Iron, Air Fryer, Asian Stir - Fry Recipes and Freezer Meals One - Pan Meals Freezer Meals Chinese Cookbook Air Fryer Cookbook Japanese Cookbook In One - Pan Meals, you'll get 30 Cast - Iron Skillet Recipes with Fresh and Low - Carb Ingredients Perfect for Your Healthy Holidays In Freezer Meals, you'll learn 30 Healthy and Easy Make Ahead Slow Cooker Meals for Busy Families In Chinese Cookbook, you'll learn 30 Best Chinese Recipes to Cook Your Favorite Authentic Meals at Home In Air Fryer Cookbook, you'll learn 30 Easy and Healthy Recipes of American Favorite Meals for Smart Weight Loss Frying In Japanese Cookbook, you'll learn Traditional Japanese Ramen, Sushi and Other Recipes for Easy and Inspirational Home Cooking Buy all five books today!

Cold water will cause constriction of the arteries and veins near the surface of the body, which will inhibit heat loss and slow the cooling process.

Their fur acts as a thermal regulator to slow down the process of heat absorption and heat loss.

That the heat absorption of the ocean as a whole (at least to 2000 m) has not significantly slowed makes it clear that the reduced warming of the upper layer is not (at least not much) due to decreasing heating from above, but rather mostly due to greater heat loss to lower down: through the 700 m level, from the upper to the lower layer.

Insulation basically slows the rate of heat loss, so the more insulation you have, the more the heat loss is slowed.

2) Heating up the 1 mm (or smaller) topmost layers of the ocean (the «skin») decreases the thermal gradient thus slowing the loss of heat from the ocean into the atmosphere.

If the sun suddenly shut off, the earth would cool down quickly, and get so cold that the greenhouse gases (most, if not all; certainly water vapor and CO2 - methane freezes at 91 degrees k or -182 deg C) that slow the loss of heat to space would condense out, making the equilibrium surface temperature even colder.

You mention the silvering of a coffee flask preventing heat loss by radiation, but the key preventer of heat loss is the vacuum which slows cooling by conduction and convection.

What the insulation does is to slow (via reduced velocity) the inexorable loss of heat from inside to outside.

Once it is hot, the heat loss will be slower with the insulation than without it, but it will not go up because it is insulated.

Changes in earth's heat from the interior plus a slow loss of atmosphere could explain this over all slow cooling.

It seems to be that the cooler a planet is, the faster the heat loss of it's internal heat, and hotter it is, the slower this loss.

Therefore it seems the loss of the heat generated from planetary formation is much slower with large planets - large planets with big atmospheres.

Greenhouse gases slow down the rate of heat - loss from the surface of the Earth, like a blanket that slows down the rate at which your body loses heat.

These temperatures in the base of the troposphere slow down and even stop the surface cooling in the early pre-dawn hours, regardless of radiation losses which are balanced by «heat creep» diffusion and conduction back into the surface.

The latest catchphrase is that GHGs «slow down» the radiative heat loss by «scattering» a portion — some say half — and therefore the Earth's surfaces do not cool down as much as they would during the night as they would with less GHGs.

The flow rate of that specific IR band has been slowed somewhat, but there has been minimal loss of the «bulk» of photons, not much heat transfer into the atmosphere.

Warming in the oceans hasn't slowed, and other impacts have accelerated — including Arctic ice melt, mass loss in ice sheets and glaciers, and a dramatic increase in heat waves around the world.

To summarise the arguments presented so far concerning ice - loss in the arctic basin, at least four mechanisms must be recognised: (i) a momentum - induced slowing of winter ice formation, (ii) upward heat - flux from anomalously warm Atlantic water through the surface low ‐ salinity layer below the ice, (iii) wind patterns that cause the export of anomalous amounts of drift ice through the Fram Straits and disperse pack - ice in the western basin and (iv) the anomalous flux of warm Bering Sea water into the eastern Arctic of the mid 1990s.

This essentially is a moderating effect, and does not seem to be dependent on re-radiation of IR trapping greenhouse gases in anyway, except to the extent that it slows the rate of heat loss at night (which may very well be a real — albiet a small — effect).

«Much of our confidence stems from the fact that our model does well at predicting slow changes in ocean heat transport and sea surface temperature in the sub-polar North Atlantic, and these appear to impact the rate of sea ice loss.

Your house insulation works by simply slowing the rate of heat loss of you house... but clearly there is no re-radiation occurring from your insulation back to the house.

So with respect to the surface and the atmosphere, the atmosphere doesn't heat the surface, or really make it warmer, all it does is slow radiative heat loss, instead of losing 356W / m ^ 2, with a 333W / m ^ 2 atmosphere all it really loses is 23W / m ^ 2.

«what does happen is that the water surface radiates away at about 400W / m ^ 2, in fact the top few microns will be cooler than the water a mm deeper because the transfer of heat from lower down (conduction, convection, diffusion etc.) is slower than the loss from the surface.»

In making that latter statement, I am not excluding that the general temperature of the atmoshere (whatever that may be) does not slow down the heat loss from the surface or affect the height at which energy is radiated into space.

Generally Accepted Explanations for discrepancy: Greenhouse effect ADDS heat and radiation to surface by some magical mechanism explained vaguely as: backradiation; insulation; slowing of loss of heat by backradiation; or other other claptrapcrap ™.

I have no problem with the argument on net energy flow and that if the atmosphere is warmer it slows down the heat loss from the warmer earth (or ocean).

The surface won't warm up to where it was before, but also the heat loss slows as a result of only the net difference between the energy radiated from the surface and the energy «returned» from the atmosphere being lost from the surface.

Summary: Surface can not be continually irradiating 390 wm - 2, if Earth is receiving only 342 wm - 2, EVEN IF THE HEAT LOSS IS SLOWED BY BACKRADIATION.

If increased it will slow down the heat loss from the black body.

«Surface can not be continually irradiating 390 wm - 2, if Earth is receiving only 342 wm - 2, EVEN IF THE HEAT LOSS IS SLOWED BY BACKRADIATION.»

Obviously that doesn't happen, what does happen is that the water surface radiates away at about 400W / m ^ 2, in fact the top few microns will be cooler than the water a mm deeper because the transfer of heat from lower down (conduction, convection, diffusion etc.) is slower than the loss from the surface.

Following cessation of emissions, removal of atmospheric carbon dioxide decreases radiative forcing, but is largely compensated by slower loss of heat to the ocean, so that atmospheric temperatures do not drop significantly for at least 1,000 years.

I went to type «warm clothing» and thought «Wait, I can't write the clothing is warm since what it does is slow the rate of heat loss, it doesn't provide warmth...»)

There is no power source so all the blanket is doing is slowing the rate of heat loss.