<p>The traditional answer basically comes down to the physics concept of adiabatic cooling, a description of which is:</p>
<ul>
<li>There is less pressure as you go up in the atmosphere (basically due to less air weighing down)</li>
<li>Air takes up more volume at lower pressures</li>
<li>Since there's nothing else to supply the energy needed to expand, the air employs the energy that was in the temperature (which is the amount of air molecule movement).  The result is that air higher up is cooler by about 10 C per km (for dry air... moisture releases heat, reducing the cooling to about 6 C per km)</li>
</ul>
<p>But, in summary, <strong>air is cooler higher up</strong> in the atmosphere.</p>
<p>And that is certainly the dynamics explaining why air temperature decreases as you go up throughout the troposphere (the only layer of the atmosphere we generally encounter in our lives... other things do come into play in other layers... such as ozone collecting and rereleasing energy from the sun in the stratosphere, actually causing warming with height there).</p>
<p>However, it seems that this typical explanation actually falls short.  Because if you pay attention to the wording of that &quot;because air higher in the atmosphere is cooler&quot; phrase, it doesn't actually answer the question.</p>
<p>Because all locations you're considering are surface locations, whether they're at sea level or in the mountains.</p>
<p>And the surface layer basically does all the absorbing of the troposphere's sunlight (the solar radiation absorbed by the troposphere is negligible).
And after all, mountainous places receive the same amount solar energy as lower elevation sites (in fact, technically a tiny bit more, that tiny tiny bit I mentioned that the troposphere takes out for sea-level locations).</p>
<p>Where am I going with this?</p>
<p>If the ground gets the same energy.  And if it's made of the same material and has the same color, it would therefore gain the same amount of temperature.  And then the air's heating comes up from the ground below.</p>
<p>So then, once again, why are mountains cooler?!?</p>
<p>Because of their <strong>EXPOSURE</strong>.<br />
Air predominantly flows horizontally rather than vertically (basically consider this an effect of gravity and the resultant air density distribution).
And it's that horizontal wind that changes everything.  Because most sites on mountains are generally quite proximate (at least regionally) to places where winds will blow in air that was higher above the lower elevation ground surface, and thus colder.  The air on mountains, with limited protection (and because winds are higher aloft) is mixed strongly with the neighboring adiabatically cooler air that's sitting above the sea-level sites.</p>
<p>Just for more convincing this is vital, I invite you to look at these climatographs comparing two cities in the US.</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/4Qckj.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/4Qckj.png" alt="2 cities, red data taken from NOAA, blue from Intellicast" /></a></p>
<p>What are these towns?<br />
Red: Wendover, Utah (elevation 4,291', latitude 40.73° N)<br />
Blue: Latrobe, Pennsylvania (elevation 997', 40.32° N)
Over a km difference in height.  So you'd expect Latrobe to be about 18°F warmer.<br />
But it isn't.  Instead it's cooler (especially during summer afternoons, which average up around 10 degrees apart).<br />
Why?  Because a lot of the intermountain west is actually quite a wide flat elevated basin\plateau.  So in the central part of this area, there isn't as much exposure to the colder air coming in from places with lower topography.</p>
<p>Rest assured, it was very hard to find examples like this.  You need a very wide flat elevated area, which is fairly uncommon.  Plus just the right place to compare to for emphasis.</p>
<p>There are other common factors that do enhance the cold predilection on mountains, including the lower moisture content at elevation, the often lighter land color of raised terrain, and the increased cloud coverage due to air rising orographically.</p>
<p><em>But the fundamental reason it is colder on mountains is <strong>adiabatic cooling</strong> and the <strong>exposure</strong> of raised locations to that colder air.</em></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-05T18:52:12.543Z
I think there are other factors that need to be considered in your comparison.  A major one is the effect of humidity.  Most of the intermountain West is quite dry, which causes much wider daily temperature swings, even if the daily average is the same.
jamesqf
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-06T22:04:43.983Z
Moisture is certainly a complex factor. I can think of 3 direct influences for a location: latent heat flux surface to aloft (cooling), clouds (likely overall cooling), and water vapor greenhouse (warming). I did try to find information on the local contribution of these factors in literature after your comment, but didn't find much. But I believe the net effect of moisture in most places [away from imbalanced diurnal sea\land breezes] to generally be small on daily MEAN temperatures (temp decrease during the day, increase at night). Moisture could well even give Latrobe a net warming effect.
JeopardyTempest
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-06T23:08:41.307Z
It certainly is challenging to find places where other factors are minimal.  I'd love to find two places that only have one difference in latitude\elevation\regional elevation differences\advection regimes, but unfortunately they're usually fairly interconnected.  That said, even if moisture is a big impact between these sites, the point it's making still stands.  Latrobe should be 20 Fahrenheit more than Wendover if it were simply dry adiabatic differences.  Even in rather dry winter, that isn't the case.
JeopardyTempest
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-06-20T10:32:50.427Z
I should note that the exposure aspect is a bit of my further thinking on the topic and not something I've seen others prove. Looking at the [Tibetan Plateau](https://www.windy.com/-Temperature-temp?temp,31.952,77.739,5) today both challenges yet perhaps affirms a bit what I'm saying. Because it's much cooler (20C today). But then adiabatic calculation suggests about 42° C cooler (being 4+ km higher than surrounding hotter regions). So again, it's complex.  (Snow coverage/land color key factors too).  So take my exposure thoughts with a grain of salt, but hope they're worthwhile at least!
JeopardyTempest
CC BY-SA 4.0
2016-11-05T07:43:44.983Z
2020-10-18T05:34:47.897Z
2020-10-18T05:34:47.897Z
JeopardyTempest
<p>I have heard numerous reasons why that is. I just want to know which one is right.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-11-05T16:04:05.650Z
If you wish to share the different reasons you've heard, we could look at the validity in them as well
JeopardyTempest
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-27T12:31:58.457Z
What reasons did you hear?
Lightness Races in Orbit
<meteorology><atmosphere><temperature><atmospheric-chemistry><atmospheric-radiation>
Why is it colder in the mountains than at sea level?
user6847056
# Why is it colder in the mountains than at sea level?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-11-05)

I have heard numerous reasons why that is. I just want to know which one is right.

**Tags:** meteorology, atmosphere, temperature, atmospheric-chemistry, atmospheric-radiation

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: If you wish to share the different reasons you've heard, we could look at the validity in them as well  
> **username_2**: What reasons did you hear?  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2016-11-05. Score: 14

The traditional answer basically comes down to the physics concept of adiabatic cooling, a description of which is:

* There is less pressure as you go up in the atmosphere (basically due to less air weighing down)
* Air takes up more volume at lower pressures
* Since there's nothing else to supply the energy needed to expand, the air employs the energy that was in the temperature (which is the amount of air molecule movement). The result is that air higher up is cooler by about 10 C per km (for dry air... moisture releases heat, reducing the cooling to about 6 C per km)

But, in summary, **air is cooler higher up** in the atmosphere.

And that is certainly the dynamics explaining why air temperature decreases as you go up throughout the troposphere (the only layer of the atmosphere we generally encounter in our lives... other things do come into play in other layers... such as ozone collecting and rereleasing energy from the sun in the stratosphere, actually causing warming with height there).

However, it seems that this typical explanation actually falls short. Because if you pay attention to the wording of that "because air higher in the atmosphere is cooler" phrase, it doesn't actually answer the question.

Because all locations you're considering are surface locations, whether they're at sea level or in the mountains.

And the surface layer basically does all the absorbing of the troposphere's sunlight (the solar radiation absorbed by the troposphere is negligible).
And after all, mountainous places receive the same amount solar energy as lower elevation sites (in fact, technically a tiny bit more, that tiny tiny bit I mentioned that the troposphere takes out for sea-level locations).

Where am I going with this?

If the ground gets the same energy. And if it's made of the same material and has the same color, it would therefore gain the same amount of temperature. And then the air's heating comes up from the ground below.

So then, once again, why are mountains cooler?!?

Because of their **EXPOSURE**.  
Air predominantly flows horizontally rather than vertically (basically consider this an effect of gravity and the resultant air density distribution).
And it's that horizontal wind that changes everything. Because most sites on mountains are generally quite proximate (at least regionally) to places where winds will blow in air that was higher above the lower elevation ground surface, and thus colder. The air on mountains, with limited protection (and because winds are higher aloft) is mixed strongly with the neighboring adiabatically cooler air that's sitting above the sea-level sites.

Just for more convincing this is vital, I invite you to look at these climatographs comparing two cities in the US.

[![2 cities, red data taken from NOAA, blue from Intellicast](https://i.sstatic.net/4Qckj.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/4Qckj.png)

What are these towns?  
Red: Wendover, Utah (elevation 4,291', latitude 40.73° N)  
Blue: Latrobe, Pennsylvania (elevation 997', 40.32° N)
Over a km difference in height. So you'd expect Latrobe to be about 18°F warmer.  
But it isn't. Instead it's cooler (especially during summer afternoons, which average up around 10 degrees apart).  
Why? Because a lot of the intermountain west is actually quite a wide flat elevated basin\plateau. So in the central part of this area, there isn't as much exposure to the colder air coming in from places with lower topography.

Rest assured, it was very hard to find examples like this. You need a very wide flat elevated area, which is fairly uncommon. Plus just the right place to compare to for emphasis.

There are other common factors that do enhance the cold predilection on mountains, including the lower moisture content at elevation, the often lighter land color of raised terrain, and the increased cloud coverage due to air rising orographically.

*But the fundamental reason it is colder on mountains is **adiabatic cooling** and the **exposure** of raised locations to that colder air.*

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: I think there are other factors that need to be considered in your comparison.  A major one is the effect of humidity.  Most of the intermountain West is quite dry, which causes much wider daily temperature swings, even if the daily average is the same.  
> **username_1**: Moisture is certainly a complex factor. I can think of 3 direct influences for a location: latent heat flux surface to aloft (cooling), clouds (likely overall cooling), and water vapor greenhouse (warming). I did try to find information on the local contribution of these factors in literature after your comment, but didn't find much. But I believe the net effect of moisture in most places [away from imbalanced diurnal sea\land breezes] to generally be small on daily MEAN temperatures (temp decrease during the day, increase at night). Moisture could well even give Latrobe a net warming effect.  
> **username_1**: It certainly is challenging to find places where other factors are minimal.  I'd love to find two places that only have one difference in latitude\elevation\regional elevation differences\advection regimes, but unfortunately they're usually fairly interconnected.  That said, even if moisture is a big impact between these sites, the point it's making still stands.  Latrobe should be 20 Fahrenheit more than Wendover if it were simply dry adiabatic differences.  Even in rather dry winter, that isn't the case.  
> **username_1**: I should note that the exposure aspect is a bit of my further thinking on the topic and not something I've seen others prove. Looking at the [Tibetan Plateau](https://www.windy.com/-Temperature-temp?temp,31.952,77.739,5) today both challenges yet perhaps affirms a bit what I'm saying. Because it's much cooler (20C today). But then adiabatic calculation suggests about 42° C cooler (being 4+ km higher than surrounding hotter regions). So again, it's complex.  (Snow coverage/land color key factors too).  So take my exposure thoughts with a grain of salt, but hope they're worthwhile at least!  

---

