Global Warming?

See my technical review of the problems with the models and the methods of analyses:
http://naturesglobalwarming.blogspot.com/

I never like to pass up the opportunity to share by understanding or misunderstanding, which ever the case may be, regarding climate.

When we refer to "Climate Change", we are referring to the far reaching effects a small change in "Biosphere Equilibrium Temperature" has on global climate.

When I use the term "Equilibrium Temperature" I am referring to the temperature at which energy input from all sources equals the energy re-radiated to space. The rate at which earth "radiates" energy back out into space increases exponentially as that equilibrium temperature.

Here is an example that may help in understanding "equilibrium temperature."

Imagine a small round glass marble in a complete vacuum. Also inside the vacuum, but not touching the marble, is a light. When the light is turned on at constant power the marble will warm to a temperature that depends on the power of the light.

The marble cannot give off energy through conduction or convection because it is in a vacuum. The only way that it can emit energy is through radiation. The frequency of that radiation is dependent upon temperature.

As the marble's temperature begins to rise; it begins to radiate energy back out into the vacuum at an "exponential rate" relative to its temperature. After some time it will be emitting radiation back into the vacuum at the same rate it is absorbing it and will stop increasing in temperature. It is now at the "Equilibrium Temperature." The "Equilibrium Temperature" is the temperature at which the marble is radiating energy at the same rate it is receiving it.

In the case of a marble that is a perfect "black body radiator," the energy input to the marble would have to increase by 16 times to double the "equilibrium temperature" of the marble. Although the Earth is not a "black body radiator", it does "radiate" energy at an exponential rate relative to its temperature. It requires very significant increases in energy input to raise the temperature of our planet; unless of course, the thermal and/or optical properties of the atmosphere are altered through a variation in chemical composition or suspended particulates.

An increasing Equilibrium Temperature, because of its effect on the Equatorial-Polar Thermal Gradient and the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere, will significantly influence global climate.

The Equatorial - Polar Thermal Gradient is the rate at which the average temperature changes from the equatorial regions to the Polar Regions. It is caused by the different amount of sun energy absorbed by the Equatorial and Polar Regions because of differing reflectivity and sun angle.

The polar ice caps are very good reflectors of Sun energy. As the area of the ice sheets decrease because of an increasing Equilibrium Temperature, the newly exposed land and ocean area, along with the increased water vapor in the atmosphere, absorbs and capacitates more sun energy, increasing polar temperature, and decreasing the average rate at which the temperature changes between the equatorial and polar regions.

This Equatorial-Polar Gradient has significant influence on global climate because it is this gradient that powers the transfer of thermal energy from the high solar input equatorial latitudes towards the polar latitudes which receive much less solar input. The thermodynamic force that is generated by this gradient powers the oceanic conveyor process, and in combination with earth's rotation, the atmospheric convection process. A huge amount of thermal energy is transferred from the equatorial to the middle and polar latitudes through these two processes.

In the case of thermal transfer due to atmospheric convection, much of the thermal energy is carried north and south away from the equatorial latitudes towards the polar latitudes in the form of water phase energy; where each gram of water evaporated at the equatorial latitudes and later condensed in precipitation transfers 540 calories of thermal energy from its place of evaporation to the place of condensation, one additional calorie for each gram per degree centigrade as it cools, and another 80 calories if it phases from the liquid state to the solid state(ice/snow). As can be seen; water vapor is a HUGE thermal reservoir in our atmosphere.

Water vapor also has significant effect on the thermal conductivity and Infrared opacity of the atmosphere. The equilibrium temperature of the planet determines the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. Globally, the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere is directly dependent on that equilibrium temperature.

Water Vapor, as a "greenhouse gas," absorbs more re-radiated Infrared energy from earth's surface than all other "greenhouse gasses" combined. The reason for this is that water vapor absorbs in the infrared bandwidth and there is so much more of it in the atmosphere.

In the case of any "thermal runaway" that could possibly occur, it will be water vapor and not carbon dioxide that drives it. Carbon Dioxide and the other more familiar Greenhouse Gases may tip a delicate balance; but it will be the increasing amounts of water vapor, as the average saturation of water vapor increases with rising temperatures, that causes the "runaway."

In the common media I have seen some comments about the effect the 11 year solar cycle has on climate.

Solar output varies only by about one tenth of one percent during that cycle. This is a very small variation in solar input when considering the exponential relationship of radiated energy to equilibrium temperature. In and of itself, a one tenth of one percent change in solar output would have a negligible effect on Equilibrium Temperature, with all other variables remaining constant.

Perhaps something worth consideration in scientific debate is orbital mechanics. One variable in this reference is the time difference between the "Anomalistic Year" and "Tropical Year"; and the affect this has on planetary albedo.

The Anomalistic Year is the time it takes for our planet to move from perihelion passage to perihelion passage. The difference between the Tropical Year and Anomalistic Year is about 1506 seconds. This results in perihelion passage shifting gradually from summer to winter and vice versa about every 10,450 years.

The northern and southern hemispheres have different reflective values because of the differing land areas, vegetation, and ice areas. As a result the earth would be absorbing solar energy at a differing rate in that 10,450 cycle.

Another consideration is that the distance between the earth and sun at perihelion passage varies considerably without any requiring any change in semi-major axis or orbital eccentricity; a variation in distance from Sun center of mass that approximates one solar diameter. This is because the prime focus of Earth's orbit is solar system Barycenter, not Sun center of mass. Earth's orbit is not heliocentric; it is barycentric with Jupiter playing a very significant role in the location of that barycenter.

The location of Solar System Barycenter is not a fixed position relative to Sun center of mass. It can be imagined as the fulcrum point where the mass of the Sun and the mass of Jupiter would balance if both were placed on a long plank. It is the center of mass of our solar system and the prime focus of all "heliocentric orbits"; it rotates about Sun center of mass, on the very approximate orbital plane of Jupiter, and in step with Jupiter's orbital track. Although the other planets and their moons contribute to total solar system mass, the sum of Sun and Jupiter Mass constitutes all but a very small percentage of the mass in our solar system.

Because Solar Insolation has an inverse cube relationship to distance from the sun, when combined with the anomalistic epochal variation discussed above, and the variation in distance from sun center of mass of Earth's orbit because of our barycentric orbit, the variation in solar input to earth would not be negligible. It is probable that this would affect equilibrium temperature even with the exponential relationship of re-radiated energy to equilibrium temperature.

Orbital dynamics must play a significant role in climate; and I believe it is important to remember that mankind has not had time to adequately accumulate empirical evidence of planetary orbital variation. Kepler died in 1630. Although 381 plus years may seem like a long time to collect data; it approximates only about 12 orbital periods of Jupiter; and the corresponding rotation of solar system barycenter. Again; the prime focus of our planet's orbit is Solar System Barycenter - not Sun center of mass. I haven't a clue as to the effect this may have on orbital perturbation; but it will absolutely affect solar insolation rates.

After referencing all of the above there are events that really make the issue of anthropogenic causes quite moot. I am referring to large volcanic or impact events; both of which have had very dramatic effect on short term climate (a few years) and quite possibly hundreds, thousands, or millions of years during times of multiple events.

When looking at relatively small impact events, the kinetic transfer may be dwarfed by the geologic energy input subsequent to the event. An example would be a 300 meter impactor with the kinetic impact equivalent of let's say - 400 megaton. Depending on where the impact takes place, it could quite possibly trigger geologic events such as volcanoes, where the geologic events could dwarf the initial impact event in reference to thermal input and atmospheric injection of dust, ash, water vapor, and other gases.

In any case, one major impact or volcanic event would render the "political debate" of anthropomorphic effects on climate; meaningless.