Excellent description of the current state. I might say that today's election results in Europe are pointing to a bit more disillusion over the Net Zero concept there as people everywhere decide that reliable and cheap are the most important aspects of energy
Chapters 11 and 12 contain serious errors and misconceptions.
288 K w – 255 K w/o = 33 C cooler is rubbish.
Nobody agrees 288 K (390 W/m^2) is the GMST plus it was 15 C in 1896.
255 K (240 W/m^2) is the spherical ToA (not surface) equilibrium OLR with a 30% albedo not a GHE. Without the “GHE” there is no 30% albedo and the equilibrium OLR becomes 278 K (342 W/m^2) 23 C warmer than the 30% case and w 30% more Q 288 K GMST would also rise by 23 C to 311 K. (Q=UA(Thot-Tcold)
The Earth is 23 C cooler (278-255, 311-288) with the atmosphere/water vapor/30% albedo not warmer.
396 upwelling LWIR is the theoretical “What if?” BB calculation for a 16 C surface that fills the denominator of the emissivity ratio. (emissivity=radiation from system/radiation from system as BB at temp) This 396 up/333 “back”/duplicate 63 GHE radiative forcing loop is “extra”, not real and has no business even being on the GHE balance graphics.
And, no, it is not measured.
IR instruments do not measure flux directly. They are designed, fabricated and calibrated to deliver a relative, comparative, referenced temperature assuming the target is a black body. If the target is not a BB the operator is advised to paint it or tape it black to mimic such or insert the known emissivity. In the case of the K-T graphic: 63/396=0.16. SURFRAD & USCRN also do this wrong.
There is no such thing as “air flux.” This requires energy flow from cool to warm w/o work violating LoT 2. (page 229 “radiative fluxes” is LoT nonsense!)
This cooling is actually produced by the kinetic heat transfer processes of the contiguous air molecules. (conduction+convection+advection+latent)
More kinetic action produces cooler temperatures and lower radiation and less kinetic action produces higher temperatures and higher radiation.
Temperature is a function of the kinetic processes, radiation is a function of temperature, radiation is a function (inverse) of the kinetic processes.
The kinetic and radiative heat transfer processes are inversely joined at the hip as demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
The obvious benefit of a Q&A format is it provides the framework for the readers to provide As to the Qs they receive outside of this knowledgeable group. Great job setting this up for everyone!
thank you NTX! I do find people like it best. And form a writing perspective gives the opportunity to directly state things instead of rambling on too much. :)
Thank you Paul. I am a huge fan of Dr. Pielke. Had the great fortune to meet him in person this week. I need to incorporate some of his great analysis into some of my stuff.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this. Must bookmark this post for further review of your book recommendations!
Excellent description of the current state. I might say that today's election results in Europe are pointing to a bit more disillusion over the Net Zero concept there as people everywhere decide that reliable and cheap are the most important aspects of energy
thank you Andy
“the Inconvenient Skeptic”
John Kehr
Chapters 11 and 12 contain serious errors and misconceptions.
288 K w – 255 K w/o = 33 C cooler is rubbish.
Nobody agrees 288 K (390 W/m^2) is the GMST plus it was 15 C in 1896.
255 K (240 W/m^2) is the spherical ToA (not surface) equilibrium OLR with a 30% albedo not a GHE. Without the “GHE” there is no 30% albedo and the equilibrium OLR becomes 278 K (342 W/m^2) 23 C warmer than the 30% case and w 30% more Q 288 K GMST would also rise by 23 C to 311 K. (Q=UA(Thot-Tcold)
The Earth is 23 C cooler (278-255, 311-288) with the atmosphere/water vapor/30% albedo not warmer.
396 upwelling LWIR is the theoretical “What if?” BB calculation for a 16 C surface that fills the denominator of the emissivity ratio. (emissivity=radiation from system/radiation from system as BB at temp) This 396 up/333 “back”/duplicate 63 GHE radiative forcing loop is “extra”, not real and has no business even being on the GHE balance graphics.
And, no, it is not measured.
IR instruments do not measure flux directly. They are designed, fabricated and calibrated to deliver a relative, comparative, referenced temperature assuming the target is a black body. If the target is not a BB the operator is advised to paint it or tape it black to mimic such or insert the known emissivity. In the case of the K-T graphic: 63/396=0.16. SURFRAD & USCRN also do this wrong.
There is no such thing as “air flux.” This requires energy flow from cool to warm w/o work violating LoT 2. (page 229 “radiative fluxes” is LoT nonsense!)
This cooling is actually produced by the kinetic heat transfer processes of the contiguous air molecules. (conduction+convection+advection+latent)
More kinetic action produces cooler temperatures and lower radiation and less kinetic action produces higher temperatures and higher radiation.
Temperature is a function of the kinetic processes, radiation is a function of temperature, radiation is a function (inverse) of the kinetic processes.
The kinetic and radiative heat transfer processes are inversely joined at the hip as demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
https://principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-with-a-boiling-water-pot/
There is no GHE, no GHG warming and no CAGW.
Thank you Arjun. Excellent, as always.
thank you Martin!
Thanks as always Arjun! Do you have any book/resource recommendations to learn more about Mr. Lee Raymond?
Thank you Steve. Private Empire is basically the history of Exxon during Lee's tenure and a bit beyond. Not a Lee Raymond biography but a good read.
Perfect! I look forward to learning more about him and his tenure. : )
The obvious benefit of a Q&A format is it provides the framework for the readers to provide As to the Qs they receive outside of this knowledgeable group. Great job setting this up for everyone!
thank you NTX! I do find people like it best. And form a writing perspective gives the opportunity to directly state things instead of rambling on too much. :)
Thanks, Arjun. There is a dark side as well to the "urgent climate crisis" crowd, discussed by the highly credible Prof. Roger Pielke here with explicit examples: https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/culling-for-climate
Thank you Paul. I am a huge fan of Dr. Pielke. Had the great fortune to meet him in person this week. I need to incorporate some of his great analysis into some of my stuff.
Well done for pointing out these politically-motivated terms. As one commentator noted, we are still waiting for “peak wood”
LOL. yes! Rob West of ThunderSaid had a similarly great line that the "Iron Age" ended in the 1300s but we still use more iron than ever.