Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Gail Coomb's comment
#1
From HERE


Quote:It IS convection STUPID!

Paraphrasing Dr. Brown, physist @ Duke University:

“When CO2 near the earth’s surface absorbs back radiation, the lifetime of the excited state caused by the absorption of the photon is much longer than the mean free time between molecular collisions between the CO_2 molecule and other molecules in the surrounding gas. That means that the radiative energy absorbed by the molecule is almost never resonantly re-emitted, it is transferred to the surrounding gas, warming not just the CO_2 but the oxygen, nitrogen, water vapor, argon as well as the other CO_2 molecules around.”
 
In other words near the surface back radiation, aka a ‘resonantly re-emitted’ photon is a RARE EVENT.
Dr Happer in his lecture for physics grad students at NCU agreed and further stated that the time to radiate is about ten times slower than the time to the next collision in the troposphere.

That means the IR energy from the earth is absorbed by CO2 and PASSED to other molecules via collision. Then VIA CONVECTION (hot air rises) the energy is transported up.

Dr Happer in his lecture also answered my question about where CO2 energy is radiated instead of being passed to other molecules via collision.

Experimental data shows barely any radiation at 11 KM and that radiating is in the stratosphere ~ 47 KM above the surface.
The take away from his UNC lecture (9/2014) was the CO2 ‘modeling’ is a mish-mash of theoretical equations and experimentally derived data. Where the Climate alarmists missed the boat is in using equations for ‘line broadening’ aka the ‘wings’ where the additional CO2 absorption ( at 400 ppm) is supposedly taking place. These equations produce results that do not match up to the experimental data. The lines are not as broad as theory would have it. This means you take the exponential curve Tony showed at his old website CO2 Greenhouse Effect Is Very Small and squash it even flatter at 400 ppm and above. This means the CO2 sensitivity is much smaller than calculated by the IPCC.

Dr Happer’s information is illustrated by the image below the Warmists use to say ozone is a greenhouse gas. The Figure is from Uherek, 2006. They even say it “show how carbon dioxide is cooling the stratosphere.” The black dotted line is the tropopause and you can see water is dumping energy just under the tropopause (the pink splotches surrounded by dark blue) while CO2 is dumping energy from just above the tropopause and up (the big yellow streak on the left) just as Dr. Happer and Dr Brown stated. Ozone is the smaller yellow streak on the right.

The legend with the illustration:
Quote:Figure 2.15: Stratospheric cooling rates: The picture shows how water, carbon dioxide and ozone contribute to longwave cooling in the stratosphere. Colors from blue through red, yellow and to green show increasing cooling, grey areas show warming of the stratosphere. The tropopause is shown as dotted line (the troposphere below and the stratosphere above). For CO2 it is obvious that there is no cooling in the troposphere, but a strong cooling effect in the stratosphere. Ozone, on the other hand, cools the upper stratosphere but warms the lower stratosphere. (ibid)

What is NOT mentions is that is where CO2 is active and NOT in the troposphere at least not below 11 KM where it barely starts radiating.

http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/glob...ooling.jpg
[Image: 39446-1.jpg]
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Gail Comb's comment Sunsettommy 0 702 12-01-2016, 12:59 PM
Last Post: Sunsettommy
  Gail Comb's comment Sunsettommy 0 909 05-25-2016, 08:50 AM
Last Post: Sunsettommy
  Gail Gombs comment Sunsettommy 0 2,628 03-21-2015, 03:29 PM
Last Post: Sunsettommy
  Gail Coomb's comment Sunsettommy 0 3,895 06-13-2014, 06:00 AM
Last Post: Sunsettommy
  Gail Combs comments Sunsettommy 0 3,663 02-12-2014, 11:51 AM
Last Post: Sunsettommy
  Gail Combs comment Sunsettommy 0 3,231 06-11-2013, 06:36 AM
Last Post: Sunsettommy
  Gail Combs comment Sunsettommy 0 4,968 12-31-2012, 06:21 PM
Last Post: Sunsettommy



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)