Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: CO2 saturation and climate sensitivity

  1. #11
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    23,027

    Re: CO2 saturation and climate sensitivity

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim the plumber View Post
    Sounds like between you and LoP you could manage it and put the video on uTube.
    Thanks, but I am sure I do not have the right equipment. I am not sure how one would measure the difference between 280 and 560 ppm with
    and accuracy on a active flow process, both are under 1%.

  2. #12
    Professor
    Steve Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    USA - Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:46 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,488

    Re: CO2 saturation and climate sensitivity

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    I went looking for the earliest source of Earth being 33C warmer than it would
    be if the atmosphere were transparent....
    Here's an interesting link from April 2018:

    CO2 is Not Driving Global Warming - Tower of Reason

    A 30 dB drop means 1/1000 of the power. To get a 30 dB drop in the available electromagnetic energy
    at 15m due to CO2 at roughly 1atmosphere, your path would only have to be 500m (1640 feet) long.
    That's way less distance than the IR radiation from the Earth has to travel to be radiated into space.
    ...
    If we were in outer space looking at the infrared emissions from the Earth and running them through a
    prism, we would detect nothing between 14.5m and 15.5m.

    Is that at odds with the conventional wisdom that says:

    In the idealised situation that the climate response to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 consisted of a
    uniform temperature change only, with no feedbacks operating (but allowing for the enhanced radiative
    cooling resulting from the temperature increase), the global warming from GCMs would be around 1.2C
    (Hansen et al., 1984; Bony et al., 2006). IPCC AR4 Chapter 8 page 631

    An old analogy says after you paint a red wall with so many layers of white paint, one more coat won't
    make it any whiter.

    I haven't seen anyone of note disagree with the basic no feed backs CO2 climate sensitivity of 1.2C.
    Climate Change policy is the real threat to humanity and the environment.

  3. #13
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    23,027

    Re: CO2 saturation and climate sensitivity

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Case View Post
    Here's an interesting link from April 2018:

    CO2 is Not Driving Global Warming - Tower of Reason

    A 30 dB drop means 1/1000 of the power. To get a 30 dB drop in the available electromagnetic energy
    at 15m due to CO2 at roughly 1atmosphere, your path would only have to be 500m (1640 feet) long.
    That's way less distance than the IR radiation from the Earth has to travel to be radiated into space.
    ...
    If we were in outer space looking at the infrared emissions from the Earth and running them through a
    prism, we would detect nothing between 14.5m and 15.5m.

    Is that at odds with the conventional wisdom that says:

    In the idealised situation that the climate response to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 consisted of a
    uniform temperature change only, with no feedbacks operating (but allowing for the enhanced radiative
    cooling resulting from the temperature increase), the global warming from GCMs would be around 1.2C
    (Hansen et al., 1984; Bony et al., 2006). IPCC AR4 Chapter 8 page 631

    An old analogy says after you paint a red wall with so many layers of white paint, one more coat won't
    make it any whiter.

    I haven't seen anyone of note disagree with the basic no feed backs CO2 climate sensitivity of 1.2C.
    I find it strange that everyone seems to accept the 2XC02 =1.2C, when that is tied back to the
    2XCO2 causing 3.71 Watts per meter square of energy imbalance, yet if all the energy is already absorbed,
    there is nothing else to add.
    Even the simulation run by real climate only showed added imbalance of ~1 watt per meter square.

  4. #14
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    23,027

    Re: CO2 saturation and climate sensitivity

    I found an Air Force paper from 1962 entitled
    AtmosphericTransmittanceFrom0.25to 28.5p.m.
    https://books.googleusercontent.com/...VmKZ6siP3qePlg
    Some of the more interesting findings were Figure 7 on page 40 entitled,
    Atmospheric transmittance for a vertical path to space from sea level for six model atmospheres.
    sealevel to space 1962.jpg
    So way back in 1962, when CO2 levels were only 318 ppm, the absorption bands around CO2
    were already saturated, zero 15 um radiation was making it from sea level to space.
    Adding CO2 might slightly broaden the absorption spectrum, but the full absorption range
    is already from 14 to 16 um, additional broadening would start to run into H2O broadening.

  5. #15
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    23,027

    Re: CO2 saturation and climate sensitivity

    An additional paper from 1956 found similar results.
    https://www.osapublishing.org/view_a...0YKT%20Library
    Atmospheric Transmission in the Infrared.
    Typical atmospheric transmission spectra are shown in Figs. 4-8. The regions 4.2 to 4.3 ,5.6 to 6.5 u, and 14.0 to 15.0,u
    were all found to be opaque over the two long paths and are omitted from the figures
    .
    IR transmission 1956.jpg
    In 1956 they found a ZERO percent transmission at 10.1 miles for 14 to 15 um radiation at sea level.
    Few things say saturation, like zero percent of the energy getting through.
    In fact the graph shows the saturation extends down to 13.5 um.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •