Two big stories have come to the surface in recent days that have the power to transform everything we think we know about climate science; more specifically, about what causes climates to change; and yet more specifically, about what causes large-scale changes in global temperatures. James Hansen’s writings were issued informally, in a casual manner, without any references or diagrams or strings of equations, and no peer review. We only listen to him because his views must be respected. He has a long history of calling for better data on sulfate aerosols. He thinks they have a cooling effect on climate, and that the magnitude of this effect due to the burning of certain fossil fuels could be much, much greater than what we now experience were it not for massive efforts to make the air a whole lot cleaner by getting the sulfur out. The CO2 that is emitted by burning these same fuels has an opposing warming effect, but its magnitude is much lower. It adds a bit more heat to temperatures each year, through the greenhouse effect, but the amount that it adds is probably not be as great as the growing amount of heat added in an average year by solar energy as a result of further reductions of sulfate aerosols.
The second big story provides credible new information that is entirely consistent with Hansen’s hypothesis. There is evidence that incoming solar energy has, by one measurement, increased by approximately 0.5 watts per square meter over a recent 20-year period. A second means of measurement fro a different source reportedly found a solar increase of a little more than twice that amount over the same period. The only possible cause for even the lesser of these solar-based increases would be from a lowering of the amount of sunlight blocked from reaching the surface, most likely by reducing the albedo effects in various places. The reduction of sulfate aerosols in the atmosphere would create that effect by lowering the brightness of cloudtops and thus their rate of reflectivity.
Some of the gain in solar energy would be captured by ocean surfaces, where up to half of the energy input would end up being stored in deeper waters for indefinitely long periods of time, thus having no immediate effect on surface temperatures—which happen to be the only place from which energy emissions to space can occur. The surface warming that does occur (and has been measured) would allow an increase in the rate of evaporation. Whatever amount of water vapor is thereby added to the atmosphere above would serve as a new source of greenhouse energy—notably, as a feedback of increased solar energy—adding more warmth to the surface below and its surrounding air in the same way that all greenhouse energy does every day. This effect, often overlooked, is meaningful on a broad scale, not just over the oceans. Tomorrow’s letter will explore these themes more fully.
The popularity of Bachelors degree continue reading these guys levitra cheapest price in Education in India is ever rising. A half erected penis is incapable of manufacturing enough insulin to do what online cialis its imagined to do. It usually embraces the similar elements of Sildenafil citrate, which is a clinically demonstrated medication. uk viagra online (Sildenafil Citrate) is ordered under the gathering of medications known as PDE5-inhibitors. We all know about ED(Erectile Dysfunction) Drugs like viagra from usa , or “the little blue pill” as it is commonly used to cure fever, cough and various immune related disorders.Before finishing today, I invite you to open the following article, entitled, “Does the West owe its rise in fossil fuels,” and examine the three incredible charts that are included: https://www.energy-reporters.com/opinion/does-the-west-owe-its-rise-to-fossil-fuels/. The correlation between GNP growth (per capita) and the consumption of fossil fuels over the centuries is undeniable. In addition, take note of the timing of takeoff and acceleration of each of three primary fossil fuels. The swift expansion of coal and oil from the late ’40s to the mid ’70s, when both of these were completely “unclean,” had the worst possible effects on the air we live with, as well as acid rain, etc. Because we had the ability to clean up the sulfur content and emissions we able to keep on burning these fuels at the same rapid rate, furthering our ability to raise our standard of living each year. And by the way, as already mentioned, the solar-based warming caused by this cleanup allows more water vapor to enter the atmosphere. Like everything else that makes the surface warmer. You’ll hear more about some “little-known-facts” and their awesome implications tomorrow.
Carl