By WUWT regular “Just The Facts”
I am often amused by claims that we understand Earth’s climate system, are able to accurately measure its behavior, eliminate all potential variables except CO2 as the primary driver of Earth’s temperature and make predictions of Earth’s temperature decades into the future, all with a high degree of confidence. I have been studying Earth’s climate system for several years and have found it to be a ridiculously complex, continually evolving and sometimes chaotic beast. Furthermore, our understanding of Earth’s climate system is currently rudimentary at best, our measurement capabilities are limited and our historical record is laughably brief. To help demonstrate the complexity of Earth’s climate system I have been compiling a list of all of the variables potentially involved in Earth’s climate system. This is a work in progress so additions, recommendations, corrections, questions etc. are most welcome. Once I develop this further and polish it up a bit I plan to convert it into a new WUWT Reference Page.
UPDATED: This list has undergone significant revisions and improvements based upon crowdsourcing the input of an array of very intelligent and knowledgeable contributors below. Additionally, this list was posted in comments in WUWT a few times previously, receiving input from a number of other very intelligent and knowledgeable contributors. This thread, along with links to the precursor threads below, will thus serve as the bibliography for the forthcoming WUWT Potential Climatic Variables reference page (unless someone can up with a better name for it…:)
1. Earth’s Rotational Energy;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotational_energy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_rotation
http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6h.html
results in day and night;
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_does_rotation_cause_day_and_night
causes the Coriolis Effect;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect
imparts Planetary Vorticity on the oceans;
http://oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/ocng_textbook/chapter12/chapter12_01.htm
and manifests as Ocean Gyres;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_gyre
the Antarctic Circumpolar Current;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Circumpolar_Current
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Conveyor_belt.svg
Arctic Ocean Circulation;
http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=12455&tid=441&cid=47170&ct=61&article=20727
http://www.john-daly.com/polar/flows.jpg
can result in the formation of Polynya;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynya
and causes the Equatorial Bulge:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equatorial_bulge
Earth’s Rotational Energy influences Atmospheric Circulation;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_circulation
including the Jet Stream;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_stream
Westerlies;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westerlies
Tradewinds;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_wind
Geostrophic Wind;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostrophic_wind
Surface Currents;
http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/Water/ocean_currents.html h
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_current
through Ekman Transport;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekman_transport
http://oceanmotion.org/html/background/ocean-in-motion.htm
Tropical Cyclones;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_cyclone
Tornadoes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tornado
and Polar Vortices;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_vortex
which “are caused when an area of low pressure sits at the rotation pole of a planet. This causes air to spiral down from higher in the atmosphere, like water going down a drain.”
http://www.universetoday.com/973/what-venus-and-saturn-have-in-common/
Here’s an animation of the Arctic Polar Vortex in Winter 2008 – 09:
When a Polar Vortex breaks down it causes a Sudden Stratospheric Warming:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudden_stratospheric_warming
Earth’s Rotational Energy influences Plate Tectonics;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics
“By analyzing the minute changes in travel times and wave shapes for each doublet, the researchers concluded that the Earth’s inner core is rotating faster than its surface by about 0.3-0.5 degrees per year.
That may not seem like much, but it’s very fast compared to the movement of the Earth’s crust, which generally slips around only a few centimeters per year compared to the mantle below, said Xiaodong Song, a geologist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and an author on the study.
http://www.livescience.com/9313-earth-core-rotates-faster-surface-study-confirms.html
The surface movement is called plate tectonics. It involves the shifting of about a dozen major plates and is what causes most earthquakes”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthquake
Volcanoes;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcano
and Mountain Formation;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_formation
which can influence the creation of Atmospheric Waves:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_wave
Lastly, Rotational Energy is the primary driver of Earth’s Dynamo;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamo_theory
which generates Earth’s Magnetic Field;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_magnetic_field
and is primarily responsible for the Earthy behaviors of the Magnetosphere;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetosphere
with certain secular variations in Earth’s magnetic field originating from ocean flow/circulation;
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/06/090622-earths-core-dynamo.html
http://iopscience.iop.org/1367-2630/11/6/063015/fulltext
though Leif Svalgaard notes that these are minor variations, as the magnetic field originating from ocean flow/circulation “is 1000 times smaller than the main field generated in the core.”
Also of note, “Over millions of years, [Earth’s] rotation is significantly slowed by gravitational interactions with the Moon: see tidal acceleration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_acceleration
“The presence of the moon (which has about 1/81 the mass of the Earth), is slowing Earth’s rotation and lengthening the day by about 2 ms every one hundred years.”
“However some large scale events, such as the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake, have caused the rotation to speed up by around 3 microseconds.[21] Post-glacial rebound, ongoing since the last Ice age, is changing the distribution of the Earth’s mass thus affecting the Moment of Inertia of the Earth and, by the Conservation of Angular Momentum, the Earth’s rotation period.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_rotation
2. Orbital Energy, Orbital Period, Elliptical Orbits (Eccentricity), Tilt (Obliquity) and Wobble (Axial precession):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_orbital_energy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synodic
http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6h.html
creates Earth’s seasons;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Season
which drives annual changes in Arctic Sea Ice;
and Antarctic Sea Ice;
the freezing and melting of which helps to drive the Thermohaline Circulation;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermohaline_circulation
and can result in the formation of Polynyas:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynya
Earth’s orbit around the Sun, Earth’s tilt, Earth’s wobble and the Moon’s orbit around Earth, Earth’s Rotation, and the gravity of the Moon, Sun and Earth, act in concert to determine the constantly evolving Tidal Force on Earth:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_force
This Tidal Force is influenced by variations in Lunar Orbit;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon
as seen in the Lunar Phases;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_phase
Lunar Precession;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_precession
Lunar Node;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_node
Saros cycles;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saros_cycle
and Inex cycles:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inex
The combined cycles of the Saros and Inex Cycles can be visualized here:
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsaros/image/SEpanoramaGvdB-big.JPG
Over longer time frames changes to Earth’s orbit, tilt and wobble called Milankovitch cycles;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
may be responsible for the periods of Glaciation (Ice Ages);
http://www.homepage.montana.edu/~geol445/hyperglac/time1/milankov.htm
that Earth has experienced for the last several million years of its climatic record:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age
Also of note, over very long time frames, “the Moon is spiraling away from Earth at an average rate of 3.8 cm per year”;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_distance_%28astronomy%29
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=124
3. Gravitation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitation
The gravity of the Moon, Sun and Earth, Earth’s rotation, Earth’s orbit around the Sun, Earth’s tilt, Earth’s wobble and the Moon’s orbit around Earth act in concert to determine the constantly evolving Tidal Force on Earth:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_force
This tidal force results in that result in Earth’s Ocean Tide;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tide
http://www.themcdonalds.net/richard/astro/papers/602-tides-web.pdf
Atmospheric Tide;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_tide
and Magma Tide:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/h7005r0273703250/
Earth’s Gravity;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convection#Gravitational_or_buoyant_convection
http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view_rec.php?id=205
in concert with Tidal Forces, influence Earth’s Ocean Circulation;
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Ocean_circulation
which influences Oceanic Oscillations including El Niño/La Niña;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Ni%C3%B1o-Southern_Oscillation
the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO);
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Decadal_Oscillation
the Atlantic Multi-Decadal Oscillation (AMO);
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Multidecadal_Oscillation
the Indian_Ocean_Dipole (IOD)/Indian Ocean Oscillation (IOO) and;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Ocean_Dipole
can result in the formation of Polynyas:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynya
Gravity Waves;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_wave
which may be partially responsible for the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation (QBO);
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-biennial_oscillation
“on an air–sea interface are called surface gravity waves or Surface Waves”;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_wave
“while internal gravity waves are called Inertial Waves”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_waves
“Rosby Waves;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rossby_waves
Geostrophic Currents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostrophic
and Geostrophic Wind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostrophic_wind
are examples of inertial waves. Inertial waves are also likely to exist in the core of the Earth”
Earth’s gravity is the primary driver of Plate Tectonics;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics
“The Slab Pull;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slab_pull
force is a tectonic plate force due to subduction. Plate motion is partly driven by the weight of cold, dense plates sinking into the mantle at trenches. This force and the slab suction force account for most of the overall force acting on plate tectonics, and the Ridge Push;
force accounts for 5 to 10% of the overall force.”
Plate Tectonics drive “cycles of ocean basin growth and destruction, known as Wilson cycles;
http://csmres.jmu.edu/geollab/fichter/Wilson/Wilson.html
involving continental rifting;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rift
seafloor-spreading;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seafloor_spreading
subduction;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subduction
and collision.”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_collision
“Climate change on ultra-long time scales (tens of millions of years) are more than likely connected to plate tectonics.”
“Through the course of a Wilson cycle continents collide and split apart, mountains are uplifted and eroded, and ocean basins open and close. The re-distribution and changing size and elevation of continental land masses may have caused climate change on long time scales”;
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ice/chill.html
a process called the Supercontinent Cycle:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercontinent_cycle
Earth’s gravity is responsible for Katabatic Wind:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katabatic_wind
4. Solar Energy;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy
results is Solar Radiation/Sunlight;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_radiation
which varies based upon 11 and 22 year cycles:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle
Total Solar Irradiance (TSI);
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/solar/solarirrad.html
appears to fluctuate “by approximately 0.1% or about 1.3 Watts per square meter (W/m2) peak-to-trough during the 11-year sunspot cycle”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_variation
Solar Energy also drives the Hydrological/Water Cycle;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrological_cycle
within the Hydrosphere;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrosphere
as Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) causes evaporation;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evaporation
that drives cloud formation;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud
results in precipitation;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precipitation_%28meteorology%29
that results in the Water Distribution on Earth;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_distribution_on_Earth
creates surface runoff;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runoff_%28water%29
which result in rivers;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River
and drives erosion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erosion
Solar energy is also “The driving force behind atmospheric circulation is solar energy, which heats the atmosphere with different intensities at the equator, the middle latitudes, and the poles.”
http://www.scienceclarified.com/As-Bi/Atmospheric-Circulation.html
Atmospheric Circulation;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_circulation
includes Hadley Cells;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadley_cell
Ferrel Cells;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_circulation#Ferrel_cell
Polar Cells;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_cells
and Polar Vortexes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_cells
all of which help to create Wind;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind
that influence Surface Currents;
http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/Water/ocean_currents.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_current
through Ekman Transport;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekman_transport
http://oceanmotion.org/html/background/ocean-in-motion.htm
and also cause Langmuir circulations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langmuir_circulation
Solar energy is also a driver of the Brewer-Dobson Circulation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewer-Dobson_circulation
Atmospheric Waves;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_wave
including Atmospheric Tides
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_tide
as well as evaporation and condensation may help to drive changes in Atmospheric Pressure:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_pressure
http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/10/24015/2010/acpd-10-24015-2010.pdf
Solar Ultraviolet (UV) radiation;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet
appears to vary by approximately 10% during the solar cycle;
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/solarsystem/features/solarcycle-sorce.html
has been hypothesized to influence Earth’s climate;
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/05/courtillot-on-the-solar-uv-climate-connection/
however Leif Svalgaard argues that,
This is well-trodden ground. Nothing new to add, just the same old, tired arguments. Perhaps a note on EUV: as you can see here (slide 13)
http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/news/2008ScienceMeeting/doc/Session1/S1_03_Kopp.pdf the energy in the EUV band [and other UV bands] is very tiny; many orders of magnitude less than what shines down on our heads each day. So a larger solar cycle variation of EUV does not make any significant difference in the energy budget.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/05/courtillot-on-the-solar-uv-climate-connection/#comment-636477
Additionally variations in Ultraviolet (UV) radiation may influence the break down of Methane;
(Source TBD)
Infrared Radiation;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared
Solar – Wind;
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/1999/ast13dec99_1/
Solar – Coronal Holes;
http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/chole.html
Solar – Solar Energetic Particles (SEP);
http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/sep.html
Solar – Coronal Mass Ejection;
http://www.esa.int/esaSC/SEMF75BNJTF_index_0.html
http://www.ratedesi.com/video/v/8AuCE_NNEaM/Sun-Erupts-to-Life-Unleashes-a-Huge-CME-on-13-April-2010
Solar Magnetosphere Breach;
Solar Polar Field Reversal;
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast15feb_1/
Solar Sector Boundary;
http://science.nasa.gov/heliophysics/focus-areas/magnetosphere-ionosphere/
Grand Minimum;
Leif Svalgaard says: February 6, 2011 at 8:26 pm
If L&P are correct and sunspots become effectively] invisible [not gone] it might mean another Grand Minimum lasting perhaps 50 years. During this time the solar cycle is still operating, cosmic rays are still modulated, and the solar wind is still buffeting the Earth.”
“It will lead to a cooling of a couple of tenths of a degree.”
Solar Influences on Climate:
http://www.leif.org/EOS/2009RG000282.pdf
Statistical issues about solar–climate relations
http://www.leif.org/EOS/Yiou-565-2010.pdf
5. Geothermal Energy;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_energy
influences Earth’s climate especially when released by Volcanoes;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcano
“which are generally found where tectonic plates are diverging;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divergent_boundary
or converging”;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_boundary
however, “intraplate volcanism has also been postulated to be caused by mantle plumes”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mantle_plume
“These so-called “hotspots”;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotspot_%28geology%29
for example Hawaii, are postulated to arise from upwelling diapirs;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diapir
from the core-mantle boundary, 3,000 km deep in the Earth.”
Volcanoes have been shown to influence Earth’s climate;
http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/how_volcanoes_work/climate_effects.html
http://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm
including in the infamous Year Without a Summer;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer
which was partially caused by the 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1815_eruption_of_Mount_Tambora
and is called a Volcanic Winter:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanic_winter
“Volcanic Ash;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanic_ash
particles have a maximum residence time in the troposphere of a few weeks.
The finest Tephera;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tephra
remain in the stratosphere for only a few months, they have only minor climatic effects, and they can be spread around the world by high-altitude winds. This suspended material contributes to spectacular sunsets.
“The greatest volcanic impact upon the earth’s short term weather patterns is caused by sulfur dioxide gas;”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_dioxide
“In the cold lower atmosphere, it is converted to Sulfuric Acid;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfuric_acid
sulfuric acid by the sun’s rays reacting with stratospheric water vapor to form sulfuric acid aerosol layers. The aerosol remains in suspension long after solid ash particles have fallen to earth and forms a layer of sulfuric acid droplets between 15 to 25 kilometers up. Fine ash particles from an eruption column fall out too quickly to significantly cool the atmosphere over an extended period of time, no matter how large the eruption.
Sulfur aerosols last many years, and several historic eruptions show a good correlation of sulfur dioxide layers in the atmosphere with a decrease in average temperature decrease of subsequent years. The close correlation was first established after the 1963 eruption of Agung volcano in Indonesia when it was found that sulfur dioxide reached the stratosphere and stayed as a sulfuric acid aerosol.
Without replenishment, the sulfuric acid aerosol layer around the earth is gradually depleted, but it is renewed by each eruption rich in sulfur dioxide. This was confirmed by data collected after the eruptions of El Chichon, Mexico (1982) and Pinatubo, Philippines (1991), both of which were high-sulfur compound carriers like Agung, Indonesia.”
http://volcanology.geol.ucsb.edu/gas.htm
There is also some evidence that if “volcanic activity was high enough, then a water vapor anomaly would be introduced into the lower stratosphere before the anomaly due to the previous eruption had disappeared. The result would be threefold in the long term: stratospheric cooling, stratospheric humidification, and surface warming due to the positive radiative forcing associated with the water vapor.”
See: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/1520-0442(2003)016%3C3525%3AAGSOVE%3E2.0.CO%3B2#h1
Geothermic Energy can also warm the atmosphere through Hot Springs;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_springs
Or warm the ocean through Hydrothermal Vents:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent
Which can be a factor in Hydrothermal Circulations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_circulation
6. Outer Space/Cosmic/Galactic Influences;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_space
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy
including Asteroids;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid
Meteorites;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteorite
and Comets;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet
can all significantly impact Earth’s climate upon impact.
It has been hypothesized that Galactic Cosmic Rays;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactic_cosmic_ray
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray
modulated by Solar Wind, may influence cloud formation on Earth:
Galactic Magnetic Fields also result in the;
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Galactic_magnetic_fields
Galactic Tide;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactic_tide
which may influence the hypothesized Oort cloud;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_Cloud
“Besides the galactic tide, the main trigger for sending comets into the inner Solar System is believed to be interaction between the Sun’s Oort cloud and the gravitational fields of near-by stars or giant molecular clouds.”
7. Magnetic Forces;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_magnetic_field
Earth Core Changes:
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/42580
“appears to be generated in the Earth’s core by a dynamo process, associated with the circulation of liquid metal in the core, driven by internal heat sources”
impact the Magnetosphere;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetosphere
including movement of the Geomagnetic Poles:
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomag/GeomagneticPoles.shtml
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/12/091224-north-pole-magnetic-russia-earth-core.html
8. Atmospheric Composition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth
Nitrogen (N2) represents approximately 780,840 ppmv or 78.084% of Earth’s Atmosphere;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen
Oxygen (O2) represents approximately 209,460 ppmv or 20.946%;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen
Argon (Ar) represents approximately 9,340 ppmv or 0.9340%;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argon
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) represents approximately 390 ppmv or 0.039%;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide
contributes to the Greenhouse Effect;
?
and
influences the rate of Plant Growth;
http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/CO2plants.htm
Neon (Ne) represents approximately18.18 ppmv or 0.001818%;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neon
Helium (He) represents approximately 5.24 ppmv (0.000524%);
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium
Krypton (Kr) represents approximately 1.14 ppmv (0.000114%);
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krypton
Methane (CH4) represents approximately 1.79 ppmv (0.000179%);
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane
contributes to the Greenhouse Effect;
?
Hydrogen (H2) represents approximately 0.55 ppmv (0.000055%);
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen
Nitrous Oxide (N2O) represents approximately 0.3 ppmv (0.00003%);
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrous_oxide
contributes to the Greenhouse Effect;
?
Ozone (O3) represents approximately 0.0 to 0.07 ppmv (0 to 7×10−6%);
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) represents approximately 0.02 ppmv (2×10−6%) (0.000002%);
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_dioxide
Iodine (I2) represents approximately 0.01 ppmv (1×10−6%) (0.000001%) and;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodine
Ammonia (NH3) represents a trace amount of Earth’s Atmosphere:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia
Additional atmosphere components includes Water vapor (H2O) that represents approximately 0.40% over full atmosphere, typically 1%-4% at surface.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_vapor;
Aerosols;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerosol
that “act as cloud condensation nuclei, they alter albedo (both directly and indirectly via clouds) and hence Earth’s radiation budget, and they serve as catalysts of or sites for atmospheric chemistry reactions.”
“Aerosols play a critical role in the formation of clouds;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clouds
Clouds form as parcels of air cool and the water vapor in them condenses, forming small liquid droplets of water. However, under normal circumstances, these droplets form only where there is some “disturbance” in the otherwise “pure” air. In general, aerosol particles provide this “disturbance”. The particles around which cloud droplets coalesce are called cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) or sometimes “cloud seeds”. Amazingly, in the absence of CCN, air containing water vapor needs to be “supersaturated” to a humidity of about 400% before droplets spontaneously form! So, in almost all circumstances, aerosols play a vital role in the formation of clouds.”
http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/Atmosphere/aerosol_cloud_nucleation_dimming.html
Particulates;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particulates
including Soot/Black Carbon;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_carbon
Sand;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand
Dust
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust
“Volcanic Ash;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanic_ash
particles have a maximum residence time in the troposphere of a few weeks.
The finest Tephera;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tephra
remain in the stratosphere for only a few months, they have only minor climatic effects, and they can be spread around the world by high-altitude winds. This suspended material contributes to spectacular sunsets.
The major climate influence from volcanic eruptions is caused by gaseous sulfur compounds, chiefly Sulfur Dioxide;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_dioxide
which reacts with OH and water in the stratosphere to create sulfate aerosols with a residence time of about 2–3 years.”
“Emission rates of [Sulfur Dioxide] SO2 from an active volcano range from 10 million tonnes/day according to the style of volcanic activity and type and volume of magma involved. For example, the large explosive eruption of Mount Pinatubo on 15 June 1991 expelled 3-5 km3 of dacite magma and injected about 20 million metric tons of SO2 into the stratosphere. The sulfur aerosols resulted in a 0.5-0.6°C cooling of the Earth’s surface in the Northern Hemisphere.”
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/index.php
“The 1815 eruption [of Mount Tambora] is rated 7 on the Volcanic Explosivity Index, the only such eruption since the Lake Taupo eruption in about 180 AD. With an estimated ejecta volume of 160 cubic kilometers, Tambora’s 1815 outburst was the largest volcanic eruption in recorded history.”
“The eruption created global climate anomalies that included the phenomenon known as “volcanic winter”;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanic_winter
1816 became known as the “Year Without a Summer”;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer
because of the effect on North American and European weather. Agricultural crops failed and livestock died in much of the Northern Hemisphere, resulting in the worst famine of the 19th century.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Tambora
“In the spring and summer of 1816, a persistent “dry fog” was observed in the northeastern US. The fog reddened and dimmed the sunlight, such that sunspots were visible to the naked eye. Neither wind nor rainfall dispersed the “fog”. It has been characterized as a stratospheric sulfate aerosol veil.”
“The greatest volcanic impact upon the earth’s short term weather patterns is caused by sulfur dioxide gas;”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_dioxide
“In the cold lower atmosphere, it is converted to Sulfuric Acid;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfuric_acid
sulfuric acid by the sun’s rays reacting with stratospheric water vapor to form sulfuric acid aerosol layers. The aerosol remains in suspension long after solid ash particles have fallen to earth and forms a layer of sulfuric acid droplets between 15 to 25 kilometers up. Fine ash particles from an eruption column fall out too quickly to significantly cool the atmosphere over an extended period of time, no matter how large the eruption.
Sulfur aerosols last many years, and several historic eruptions show a good correlation of sulfur dioxide layers in the atmosphere with a decrease in average temperature decrease of subsequent years. The close correlation was first established after the 1963 eruption of Agung volcano in Indonesia when it was found that sulfur dioxide reached the stratosphere and stayed as a sulfuric acid aerosol.
Without replenishment, the sulfuric acid aerosol layer around the earth is gradually depleted, but it is renewed by each eruption rich in sulfur dioxide. This was confirmed by data collected after the eruptions of El Chichon, Mexico (1982) and Pinatubo, Philippines (1991), both of which were high-sulfur compound carriers like Agung, Indonesia.”
http://volcanology.geol.ucsb.edu/gas.htm
There is also some evidence that if “volcanic activity was high enough, then a water vapor anomaly would be introduced into the lower stratosphere before the anomaly due to the previous eruption had disappeared. The result would be threefold in the long term: stratospheric cooling, stratospheric humidification, and surface warming due to the positive radiative forcing associated with the water vapor.”
See: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/1520-0442(2003)016%3C3525%3AAGSOVE%3E2.0.CO%3B2#h1
9. Albedo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albedo
“or reflection coefficient, is the diffuse reflectivity or reflecting power of a surface. It is defined as the ratio of reflected radiation from the surface to incident radiation upon it. Being a dimensionless fraction, it may also be expressed as a percentage, and is measured on a scale from zero for no reflecting power of a perfectly black surface, to 1 for perfect reflection of a white surface.”
Clouds
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clouds
Aerosols
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerosol
“act as cloud condensation nuclei, they alter albedo (both directly and indirectly via clouds) and hence Earth’s radiation budget, and they serve as catalysts of or sites for atmospheric chemistry reactions.”
“Aerosols play a critical role in the formation of clouds. Clouds form as parcels of air cool and the water vapor in them condenses, forming small liquid droplets of water. However, under normal circumstances, these droplets form only where there is some “disturbance” in the otherwise “pure” air. In general, aerosol particles provide this “disturbance”. The particles around which cloud droplets coalesce are called cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) or sometimes “cloud seeds”. Amazingly, in the absence of CCN, air containing water vapor needs to be “supersaturated” to a humidity of about 400% before droplets spontaneously form! So, in almost all circumstances, aerosols play a vital role in the formation of clouds.”
http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/Atmosphere/aerosol_cloud_nucleation_dimming.html
Snow
Ice
Water
Particulates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particulates
Soot/Black Carbon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_carbon
Algae (Ocean Surface)
10. Biology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology
“Phototrophs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoautotroph
are the organisms (usually plants) that carry out photosynthesis;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis
to acquire energy. They use the energy from sunlight to convert carbon dioxide and water into organic materials to be utilized in cellular functions such as biosynthesis and respiration.” “In plants, algae, and cyanobacteria, photosynthesis uses carbon dioxide and water, releasing oxygen as a waste product.”
Chemoautotrophs;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemotroph
are “organisms that obtain carbon through Chemosynthesis;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemosynthesis
are phylogenetically diverse, but groups that include conspicuous or biogeochemically-important taxa include the sulfur-oxidizing gamma and epsilon proteobacteria, the Aquificaeles, the Methanogenic archaea and the neutrophilic iron-oxidizing bacteria.”
Bacteria – TBD
Fungi – TBD
Protozoa – TBD
Chromista – TBD
Animal – Anthropogenic including:
Carbon Dioxide;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide
contributes to the Greenhouse Effect;
?
and
influences the rate of plant growth ;
http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/CO2plants.htm
Methane
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane
Nitrous Oxide
Ozone
Particulates, especially Black Carbon/Soot
Aerosols
Icebreakers/Arctic Shipping/Fishing/Cruise-Line Transits
Contrails
Nuclear Power Generation – Including Ships
Land Use Changes – Including De and Re-Forestation
Urban Heat Islands
Run Off From Asphalt/Urban Heat Islands
Fossil Fuel Energy Generation Waste Heat –
Renewables – Wind Farms, Solar Arrays, Dams and Ethanol
Sewage/Wastewater Treatment Discharge
etc.
Animal – Non-Anthropogenic including
Plankton
Beaver (Genus Castor)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaver
etc.
11. Chemical
Fossil Fuels:
Coal
Oil shale
Petrochemicals
– Petroleum
– Mineral Oil
Asphalt
Tar Pits/Sands
Methane
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane
etc.
“Photosynthesis;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis
is a chemical process that converts carbon dioxide into organic compounds, especially sugars, using the energy from sunlight.”
“Chemosynthesis;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemosynthesis
is the biological conversion of one or more carbon molecules (usually carbon dioxide or methane) and nutrients into organic matter using the oxidation of inorganic molecules (e.g. hydrogen gas, hydrogen sulfide) or methane as a source of energy, rather than sunlight, as in photosynthesis.”
Reactions:
Combustion
– Forest Fires
– Fossil Fuels
– – Methane
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane
etc.
Conversion of Methane, CO2, etc.
12. Physics – Other
Temperature
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature
Pressure
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressure
States of Matter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_matter
Heat Conduction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_conduction
Convection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convection
Thermal Radiation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_radiation
Thermodynamics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics
-Entropy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy
General summaries of the potential variables involved in Earth’s climate system;
http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/7y.html
http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/pd/climate/factsheets/whatfactors.pdf
justthefactswuwt says:
July 4, 2011 at 2:26 pm
“So when measuring climate sensitivity to CO2, we should be identifying the “PART OF” the warming observed between 1975 and 2005 that might be related to natural oceanic cycles and eliminate it, lest we over estimate Earth’s sensitivity to increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations?”
It seems a rather short time-scale to use, but in principle yes.
But if PART OF the warming observed between 1975 and 2005 IS related to natural oceanic cycles then where did the energy come from ?
You cannot warm stuff without either adding energy or slowing its rate of loss.
If the energy was allready in the oceans, then they would not have expanded as they warmed over that period.
If the ocean currents slowed the rate of heat loss… how?
Good observation shows surface warming over the period which would INCREASE the rate of energy loss, not reduce it.
izen says:
July 4, 2011 at 1:54 pm
@-David Falkner
You have counted gravitational energy twice.
Tides and density stratification are different effects driven by the same source of energy.
Actually, I did that because it looked like you had listed them separately due to the double use of ‘and’ and the lack of comma between ‘…Moon/Sun and… made me read it as a list broken up by bad grammar. 🙂
izen says: July 4, 2011 at 3:47 pm
Okay, I’ll give you geothermal, would you agree that its total magnitude is about one third of the small variation in the solar ‘constant’ we have dissected in detail?…-grin-
Similar to the inherent inaccuracies in estimating of Earth surface TSI, I don’t think we have an accurate estimate of Geothermal Energy;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_energy
and it’s influences. I agree that the warming of the ocean through Hydrothermal Vents;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent
which can be a factor in Hydrothermal Circulations;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_circulation
is not a major direct contributor of energy to earth’s climate system.
However, volcanoes;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcano
which have been shown to influence Earth’s climate;
http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/how_volcanoes_work/climate_effects.html
http://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm
including in the infamous Year Without a Summer;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer
which was partially caused by the 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1815_eruption_of_Mount_Tambora
and is called a Volcanic Winter;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanic_winter
can have a major impact on Earth’s climate system.
What on Earth, or out of it is – 3. Orbital Energy and how does it move water ?
Orbital Energy;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_orbital_energy
http://burro.cwru.edu/Academics/Astr221/Gravity/orbenergy.htm
is the energy that keeps an object in orbit around another:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit
http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6h.html
Earth’s orbit around the Sun, Earth’s tilt, Earth’s wobble and the Moon’s orbit around Earth, Earth’s Rotation, and the gravity of the Moon, Sun and Earth, act in concert to determine the constantly evolving Tidal Force on Earth:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_force
This Tidal Force is influenced by variations in Lunar Orbit;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon
including Lunar Precession;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_precession
Lunar Node;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_node
Saros cycles;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saros_cycle
and Inex cycles:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inex
The combined cycles of the Saros and Inex Cycles can be visualized here:
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEsaros/image/SEpanoramaGvdB-big.JPG
The Earth’s Orbit around the sun creates Earth’s seasons;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Season
which drives annual changes in Arctic Sea Ice;
and Antarctic Sea Ice;
the freezing and melting of which helps to drive the Thermohaline Circulation;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermohaline_circulation
I gave you an answer, now can you please answer my questions, i.e.:
When measuring climate sensitivity to CO2, we should be identifying the “PART OF” the warming observed between 1975 and 2005 that might be related to natural oceanic cycles and eliminate it, lest we over estimate Earth’s sensitivity to increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations?
Per this chart from NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory;
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/research/themes/forcing/img/fig1.gif
they don’t seem to account for Ocean Cycles/Oscillations at all. Why?
Just The Facts;
All climate is local. Any western gardener knows this is true. Why else is climate described and classified by zones? See the Western Garden Book for a good starting list of factors that determine what your local climate is.
http://www.sunset.com/garden/climate-zones/climate-zones-intro-us-map-00400000036421/
Off the top of my head the list includes:
Latitude
Elevation
Slope (steepness)
Exposure (north, south, east, west)
prevailing wind
humidity
soil type
drainage
humidity
T max,T min, Delta T
number of frost free days
proximity to bodies of water
humidity
micro-climate
seasonal precipitation
rain-shadow effect
Humidity (again).
You get the point.
Thanks for a great article.
Wikipedia huh?
Well, now I know where to go for reference material for all my papers in future. But could I ask a favour please?
Next time, try linking to some actual science. Thanks
commieBob says: June 30, 2011 at 6:56 pm
The climate is the very definition of a chaotic system. I heard an interview with Lorenz (discoverer of chaos theory). He had run a climate model and there was a problem before the run could be completed. He needed the results and didn’t have enough time to run the model again. He decided to run the model with fewer significant digits. That would speed up the process with, he thought, a loss of accuracy. The results were, however, completely different. This led to: “Does the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas? ” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect
Perhaps your list could have something on chaos theory added. http://www.schuelers.com/ChaosPsyche/part_1_3.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory
I’ve considered this, but while there are chaotic components and occurrences throughout the climate system, I do not think that “the climate is the very definition of a chaotic system”. I think that, with many more generations of measurement and research, eventually we will be able to identify a reasonable degree of order within the overall system. I was quite deliberate in my phrasing of it as “sometimes chaotic”. I think it just seems more chaotic from our current vantage point because our present understanding of Earth’s climate system is so rudimentary.
mandas says: July 4, 2011 at 6:12 pm
Wikipedia huh?
Well, now I know where to go for reference material for all my papers in future. But could I ask a favour please?
Next time, try linking to some actual science. Thanks
Already addressed in comments here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/30/earths-climate-system-is-ridiculously-complex-with-draft-link-tutorial/#comment-692055
“I’ve also struggled with the use of Wiki and eschewed them for a couple years, but there have been some improvements, they are the most comprehensive source and I’ve decided that the best way to fix the issues with Wiki is to shine the light of scrutiny on them”
@- justthefactswuwt says:
July 4, 2011 at 5:43 pm
“they don’t seem to account for Ocean Cycles/Oscillations at all. Why?”
The basic reason is the 1st Law of Thermodynamics.
All the historical and theoretical evidence is that ocean currents/cycles are energy neutral.
They can store, move and release energy in response to changes in the energy balance, but don’t cause or drive them.
Like water vapour they are a feedback not a forcing.
@- justthefactswuwt
Isn’t orbital energy just gravitational energy?
After all if the Earth, and its gravity field, were to suddenly vanish the Moon would continue at a tangent and that ‘orbital energy’ would have vanished along with the Earths gravity.
izen says: July 5, 2011 at 1:53 am (Edit)
Isn’t orbital energy just gravitational energy?
After all if the Earth, and its gravity field, were to suddenly vanish the Moon would continue at a tangent and that ‘orbital energy’ would have vanished along with the Earths gravity.
No, as you said, if gravity were to vanish the moon would “continue”. It is this momentum;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum
and whatever imparted it, that embodies “orbital energy”, gravity just constrains its path. For reference, “orbital velocity of the Moon about the Earth (1 km/s) is small compared to the orbital velocity of the Earth about the Sun (30 km/s)”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon
This is why proof by exhaustion is limited to high-level mathematical proofs and low-level whodunnits.
izen says: July 4, 2011 at 4:23 pm
It seems a rather short time-scale to use, but in principle yes.
But if PART OF the warming observed between 1975 and 2005 IS related to natural oceanic cycles then where did the energy come from ?
I’d assume it comes primarily from the Sun, with a minor contribution from Geothermic.
You cannot warm stuff without either adding energy or slowing its rate of loss.
If the energy was allready in the oceans, then they would not have expanded as they warmed over that period.
Valid point. There is an increase in Ocean Heat Content;
http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/heat_content55-07.png
that still needs a explanation.
If the ocean currents slowed the rate of heat loss… how?
Good observation shows surface warming over the period which would INCREASE the rate of energy loss, not reduce it.
Here’s where I’d like to do more research to understand the mechanisms behind ocean heat loss. Conceptually, I imagine if ocean deepwater mixing decreased, it might allow a pool of warmer water to remain on the surface, which could contribute to an increase in atmospheric temperature. However, this would seem to increase the rate of energy loss, which isn’t borne out by the Ocean Heat Content data.
izen says: July 5, 2011 at 1:01 am
The basic reason is the 1st Law of Thermodynamics.
All the historical and theoretical evidence is that ocean currents/cycles are energy neutral.
They can store, move and release energy in response to changes in the energy balance, but don’t cause or drive them.
Like water vapour they are a feedback not a forcing.
I agree that averaged over the long term ocean currents/cycles are energy neutral, but imagine that at any moment in time, or even for extended periods, the ocean could be gaining or losing energy, depending on circulation patterns.
The long laundry list of geophysical processes presented here as the “ridiculously complex climate system” is curiously preoccupied with mechanical aspects, many of which (e.g., gravity waves) are of little consequence to the redistribution of thermal energy within the system. Even at the purely mechanical level, there is no sense of quantitative proportion, with second-order effects such as Ekman pumping (~micrometers/sec) presented on equal footing with geostrophic currents (~tens of cms/sec). This merely perpetuatues the notion that EVERYTHING is climate-related, an idea nurtured nowadays by academics seeking funding for marginal studies.
The planetary climate system is intrinsically a solar-driven thermodynamic one, with enthalpy serving to account for energy states (including work done by transmuted mechanical enegy) and with the profound priciple of entropy directing the energy flow through the material substances of the planet. Strangely, no reference is made to those key concepts. Absent any understanding of these physical essentials, it’s a small wonder that the system seems totally bewildering to the self-taught.
John R T says: June 30, 2011 at 7:29 pm
Can you search for the word ´varies?´ Should be VARY. oops-.-. here it is
¨…appears to varies/VARY by approximately 10% during the solar cycle;
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/solarsystem/features/solarcycle-sorce.html¨
Corrected.
The following entry also has a grammar/typo error. May be the word ´grand.´
Not seeing this one. Do you mean the solar grand minimum?
This contribution is priceless. Last year, I spent several weeks on Donna´s IPCC audit. What about crowd-sourcing?
The more the merrier. The internet is an amazing tool for collecting and consolidating human knowledge.
AND, what about our friendly Castor X neighbors: for decades, they enjoyed the distinction of Greatest Changers of the Earth´s surface!
Yes, good one, “The beaver (genus Castor) is a primarily nocturnal, large, semi-aquatic rodent. Castor includes two extant species, North American Beaver (Castor canadensis) (native to North America) and Eurasian Beaver (Castor fiber) (Eurasia). Beavers are known for building dams, canals, and lodges (homes). They are the second-largest rodent in the world (after the capybara). Their colonies create one or more dams to provide still, deep water to protect against predators, and to float food and building material. The North American beaver population was once more than 60 million, but as of 1988 was 6–12 million. This population decline is due to extensive hunting for fur, for glands used as medicine and perfume, and because their harvesting of trees and flooding of waterways may interfere with other land uses
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaver
Added under 10. Biology – Animal – Non-Anthropogenic .
Thank you for your help.
sky says: July 5, 2011 at 7:31 pm
The long laundry list of geophysical processes presented here as the “ridiculously complex climate system” is curiously preoccupied with mechanical aspects, many of which (e.g., gravity waves) are of little consequence to the redistribution of thermal energy within the system. Even at the purely mechanical level, there is no sense of quantitative proportion, with second-order effects such as Ekman pumping (~micrometers/sec) presented on equal footing with geostrophic currents (~tens of cms/sec). This merely perpetuatues the notion that EVERYTHING is climate-related, an idea nurtured nowadays by academics seeking funding for marginal studies.
You want me to quantify the proportional impact of those beavers? It’s just a list, read into it as you wish.
The planetary climate system is intrinsically a solar-driven thermodynamic one, with enthalpy serving to account for energy states (including work done by transmuted mechanical enegy) and with the profound priciple of entropy directing the energy flow through the material substances of the planet. Strangely, no reference is made to those key concepts. Absent any understanding of these physical essentials, it’s a small wonder that the system seems totally bewildering to the self-taught.
Yes, I am sure all of the self-taught are totally bewildered and just wishing that they could delude themselves into knowing it all like you do…
Good grief.
Leif Svalgaard says:
July 4, 2011 at 6:23 am
Hard to interact with nonsense.
You can tell the difference? What a surprise.
Right, it rains at times, even snows here and there.
See what I have to put up with? Your lack of comprehension is astonishingly suprising in one so, presumably, well educated. Was it really so difficult to join the dots and see what I was amused by?
The fluid gas molecules of nitrogen, oxygen and carbon dioxide are designated ideal gases while the fluid gas water vapour isn’t? And such a gobbledegook reason??! The utter stupidity of AGWScience is matched only by those who can see the stupidity but continue promoting it.
So, water vapour alone is allowed to have volume, weight etc., to interact with other molecules..? How then does carbon dioxide manage to interact with it to form carbonic acid? How??
AGWScience in its la-la land has carbon dioxide bouncing off water without interacting and water able to interact. What happens then? Since in real life this is a spontaneous interaction, rain is carbonic acid which shows they have combined, in la-la land the water is continually chasing carbon dioxide which bounces off the water which chases the carbon dioxide which still plays impossible to get – a sad saga of unrequited passion; rain in AGWScience isn’t carbonic acid.
http://www.chemistryland.com/CHM107Lab/Exp02_Exhaust/Lab2Exp2Exhaust.html
Which words don’t you understand in the definition of ideal gas I posted a link? We can take this slowly.. I have a lot of patience.
Sound waves have nothing to do with the thermal motions of the molecules. Here you can learn more about gases
This was in response to my: “Gases do not move at vast speeds through real air, they vibrate where they are – how sound travels” Followed by an excellent page describing exactly this, “how sound travels an example of air is not ideal gas molecules, it takes sound, work, to move them, and then they finish vibrating and stay where they were. Is the concept of our atmosphere being a difinate entity with weight and volume that difficult to grasp? They may well be moving at vast speeds, but they’re not going anywhere under the great pressure of our atmosphere under gravity, a ton per square foot.
Well, again, I’m surprised you didn’t get my meaning and that you have apparently taken it out of context of it being a reply to izen who is under the impression from AGWScience that because molecules of carbon dioxide nitrogen and oxygen are ideal gases they rush through the atmosphere at great speeds and can’t separate out because they’re moving too fast. I thought it an excellent example to convey the real atmosphere which is our gas Air, which has weight , volume, subject to gravity etc., , and the molecules of nitrogen and oxygen not rushing anywhere – if they were rushing around at great speed through empty space around them there would be no sound.
This is why izen thinks they cannot separate out, but they do. Real life is full of examples of gases separating out and forming layers.. I gave examples.
Izen and Ric Werme – please make some effort to follow what I have made a great effort to explain. MY POINT, is that AGWScience promotes such memes which don’t have any reality in real world physics. Gases do separate out, they don’t travel at vast speeds through empty space, etc. I am showing where these memes are created. They’re created by taking laws, concepts and processes out of context, changing properties.
Until this is appreciated, understood, you won’t be able to spot other places where they do this. The other example I’ve given is the claim that Light, not Heat, warms the land and oceans; by excluding thermal infrared and saying short wave non-thermal convert the heat.. Visible Light from the Sun cannot convert water to heat – water is a transparent medium for it, it is transmitted through water without change. Except for a slowing down.
Leif – it seems you’ve been looking for ways to get rid of sunspots, perhaps this will help: http://www.livestrong.com/sun-spots/
….
justthefactswuwt says:
July 5, 2011 at 8:24 pm
“Yes, I am sure all of the self-taught are totally bewildered and just wishing that they could delude themselves into knowing it all like you do…”
Oh my, you’ve got nothing but attitude to offer in your reply! And you’ve gotten a head start on delusions with your aphysical notion that planetary rotation is capabable of INITIATING any mechanical motion. Get back to me when billiard balls placed at rest on a table start rolling due to the Coriolis effect.
Myrrh says:
July 5, 2011 at 10:15 pm
So, water vapour alone is allowed to have volume, weight etc., to interact with other molecules..? How then does carbon dioxide manage to interact with it to form carbonic acid? How??
How does oxygen manage to interact with carbon to form carbon dioxide?
All reactions are simply molecules or atoms meeting. All gases, liquids, materials have volume, weight, etc. Not just water vapor. And all gases are molecules/atoms that move around at typically 1000 miles/hour through empty space. None of this has anything to do with AGW, but is basic, high school physics. When reading your tirades one stops wondering why the US is falling behind other nations in science. All it takes is enough Myrrhs out there.
sky says: July 6, 2011 at 4:17 pm
Oh my, you’ve got nothing but attitude to offer in your reply!
I think that door swings both ways…
And you’ve gotten a head start on delusions with your aphysical notion that planetary rotation is capabable of INITIATING any mechanical motion. Get back to me when billiard balls placed at rest on a table start rolling due to the Coriolis effect.
Apparently delusional and forgetful, or perhaps you just didn’t “waste” any time reading up on the influences of Planetary Vorticity on Ocean Circulation?:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/27/climate-variability-leakage-around-the-cape-of-good-hope/#comment-654073
Hello Leif
What are your thoughts on this comment by “KevinK”;
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/30/earths-climate-system-is-ridiculously-complex-with-draft-link-tutorial/#comment-692068
in terms his “model for the thermal conductivity of air”?
I do agree with “KevinK”, and somewhat grudgingly with “sky”, that I should include Thermodynamics as a variable. Do you think it is appropriate to include it under the “Solar Energy” category, should I create a new category “Physics” and put Gravitation and Thermodynamics under it, or otherwise?
justthefactswuwt says:
July 6, 2011 at 8:09 pm
Hello Leif, What are your thoughts on this comment by “KevinK”;…
I’am not sure what he is getting at. That the formula looks complex is a strawman. It is not really, just a simple fit to a non-linear relation, I don’t see where ‘thermodynamics’ comes in, but if you want to include all [including the kitchen sink], go ahead. It seems to me that a more fruitful approach would be to trim away stuff that is marginal and only keep what is important.
Leif Svalgaard says: July 6, 2011 at 8:18 pm
justthefactswuwt says: July 6, 2011 at 8:09 pm
I don’t see where ‘thermodynamics’ comes in
I was thinking of in the context of heat transfer between the ocean and the atmosphere, but that it varies, means it probably deserves a place on the kitchen sink list.
, but if you want to include all [including the kitchen sink], go ahead. It seems to me that a more fruitful approach would be to trim away stuff that is marginal and only keep what is important.
I agree, per this comment;
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/30/earths-climate-system-is-ridiculously-complex-with-draft-link-tutorial/#comment-692694
I am thinking of adding a “Significant Climatic Influences” page, and/or a “Significant Temperature Influences” page, which might build on something like this;
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/research/themes/forcing/img/fig1.gif
but I am this far into building a reasonably consummate list, so I plan to add this, and the in progress Tropical Cyclone page (Password WUWT);
http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/tropical-cyclone/
to the Reference Pages, before I start the process of trimming down the marginal variables and categorizing the remaining ones by importance.
Leif Svalgaard says:
July 6, 2011 at 5:05 pm
How does oxygen manage to interact with carbon to form carbon dioxide? All reactions are simpy molecules or atmos meeting. All gases, liquids, materials have volume, weight, etc. Not just water vapor. And all gases are molecules/atoms that move around at typically 1000 miles/hour through empty space. None of this has anything to do with AGW, but is basic, high school physics. When reading your tirades one stops wondering why the US is falling behind other nations in science. All it takes is enough Myrrhs out there.
Astonishing. You really don’t see the disjunct, do you? Something with volume and weight surrounded by others with volume and weight is not in empty space. Our atmosphere is the liquid gas Air comprised of nitrogen and oxygen, the molecules are constrained by the volume and weight of the molecules around them and by gravity. They are not moving at 1000 mph through our atmosphere.
AGWScience fiction teaches that this is empty space – with molecules of nitrogen, oxygen and carbon dioxide zooming around at these vast speed through this empty space because AGWScience teaches that these are ideal gases and obey ideal gas law. But they are real gases, no real gas obeys the ideal gas law. That is basic real world high school physics, or was. This is what has confused izen – why he thinks that the molecules are travelling so fast and bouncing off each other that they cannot separate out, because that’s the description of ideal gas without weight or volume, and, without interactions – your oxygen and carbon cannot form carbon dioxide! They can’t be both. And, that’s why y’all get hung up about kinetic energy as the only reaction with electromagnetic visible. Weren’t you taught that an ideal gas is purely imaginary? It doesn’t exist.
I posted links (July 3 11:53 am) firstly to a page typical of this AGWScience slant which appears to give loads of information about ideal and real gases, but instead confuses the two throughout – and even in giving the history of the various ideal gas laws it fails to give the continuation – disingenously. I also quoted the definition of the ideal gas from the second link – which if you’d bothered to read before producing your ranting attacks you might have got to grips with following my explanations and seen its your understanding that’s p*ss poor and that the true lack of real basic science education is because of people like you promoting it who don’t know what they’re talking about. And, I gave a quote about the continuation of the history in my last link. I suggest you read that post and make an effort to understand what I’m saying here. AGWScience is teaching flawed assumptions. This is well-known in real world traditional physics.
And the land and the atmosphere, heat rises and cold sinks. Convection is the main method of heat transfer in our atmosphere – this is the fluid gas Air, thus convection not radiation – from which we get our weather, our winds are basically created when volumes of hot air rise to be replaced by volumes of cold air. Without a proper understanding of thermodynamics here it isn’t possible to understand, for example, how the Water Cycle is the real greenhouse gas for cooling the Earth as it takes the heat away into the cooler heights where water vapour condenses out and releases the heat, which always flows spontaneously from the hotter to the colder.. As I mentioned before, the wiki page you linked to gave the accepted figure of 67°C for the temp of the Earth without the Water Cycle, but it was garbled. It’s deliberately garbled because the promotion of AGWScience is for the meme that water in the atmosphere only adds heat from the upwelling thermal infrared, heat, and so the water cycle and convection and cooling have been thrown out.
The real greenhouse is our whole atmosphere, all the gases in our atmosphere, including nitrogen and oxygen, that is they are also greenhouse gases. It was called this because like a real greenhouse where conditions are good and heating and cooling are regulated for optimum plant growth, our Earth has an atmosphere in which the heating and cooling is overall balanced for the proliferation of life out of the good conditions created by our gases. We really do need to get back to this and out of the ‘mind-set’ of AGWScience misdirection.
Myrrh says:
July 7, 2011 at 1:11 pm
They are not moving at 1000 mph through our atmosphere.
They are our atmosphere and our atmosphere consists solely of molecules moving through empty space [that between the molecules] at 1000 mph.
no real gas obeys the ideal gas law.
Of course not. That is why it is called the ideal gas law. But the real gases are very close to being ideal gases, and only deviate a few percent from the ideal law. This has been known for some centuries now. Even at the center of the sun where the gas has a density ten times that of lead, they very closely obey the ideal gas law. Their speed is even much higher [627 km/s] than in our cold atmosphere.