Let's Investigate CO2 Effect on the Globe
The global warming caused by CO2 theory is that more CO2 presence in the atmosphere will result in a warmer globe because the escape heat originally from the sun when bounced off from the earth is reflected back into the atmosphere consequently causes a rise in temperature.
I would like to examine 2 cases: a thick layer of CO2 versus a thin layer of CO2.
* Case 1: Imagine a very thick layer of CO2 capable of blocking 50% of heat from the sun and an amount of heat = 100 heat units traveling to the earth. Obviously, an amount of heat equals to 50 heat units will reach the earth after the first pass through this layer. Now imagine the earth capable to absorb 50% heat and reflect the other 50%, then 25 earth reflected heat units will go up and meet the same layer again with 50% (=12.5 heat units) reflected back to earth. At this time, the earth contains 37.5 heat units within its atmosphere (including 25 heat units from the first absorption and the new reflected 12.5 heat units).
* Case 2: Imagine a thinner layer of CO2 capable of blocking 10% of heat from the sun and an amount of heat = 100 heat units traveling to the earth. Obviously, an amount of heat equals to 90 heat units will reach the earth after the first pass through this layer. Now imagine the earth capable to absorb 50% heat and reflect the other 50%, then 45 earth reflected heat units will go up and meet the same layer again with 10% (=4.5 heat units) reflected back to earth. At this time, the earth contains 49.5 heat units within its atmosphere (including 45 heat units from the first absorption and the new reflected 4.5 heat units).
Comparing the 2 cases, it shows that a thinner layer of CO2 will result in a warmer earth and vice versa.
Oops! this suggests that Al Gore was wrong since it should have been the other way around whereas more CO2 is supposed to result in less heat.
What have I done wrong?
Valued Senior Member
What you have done wrong is assume an incorrect mechanism. In A nut shell, what happens is that sine CO2 is transparent to visible light and not transparent to infrared, the visible light from the Sun passes through with no problem, where it heats the surface of the Earth. The surface radiates away this heat as infrared. This infrared radiation is absorbed by the CO2, Which in turn, warms the atmosphere, leading to global warming. More CO2, has no effect on the visible light reaching the surface, but does has an effect on how much of the radiating infrared is trapped by the atmosphere.
the infrared light from the sun is what is radiated back. And believe me I did charts in Stella ( an environment program) and carbon dioxide really isnt warming or cooling it...all this temp. chaos is on a local scale only.
CO2 does not "block" any "heat" from the sun - it absorbs infrared, transmits visible light and some other wavelenghs.
The "greenhouse effect" is from the absorption - and re-radiation, reabsorption, etc, within the lower atmosphere - of infrared wavelenghs that would otherwise escape into space from the surface.
Has there been any kind of laboratory experiment to prove that CO2 does absorb these infrared light? For instant, how about a big round ball made of glass representing the atmosphere with an object in the middle represent the earth in a dark room with only one heat light source with constant output. First measure the temperature at the surface of the earth object with just regular air then repeat with the glass ball filled with CO2. The temperatures then can be compared...
thou art wise oJjames R
Svante Arrhenius developed a theory to explain the ice ages, and first speculated that changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect ("On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air Upon the Temperature of the Ground", Philosophical Magazine 1896(41): 237-76). He was influenced by the work of others, including Joseph Fourier. Arrhenius used the infrared observations of the moon by Frank Washington Very and Samuel Pierpont Langley at the Allegheny Observatory in Pittsburgh to calculate the absorption of CO2 and water vapour. Arrhenius' painstaking calculations were later shown to be erroneous. Using the just published Stefan Boltzmann law he formulated his greenhouse law. ...
Arrhenius' high absorption values for CO2, however, met criticism by Knut Ångström in 1900, who published the first modern infrared spectrum of CO2 with two absorption bands.
So, yes, the experiments were performed about 100 years ago.
Co2 isn't the problem, well it is the problem but the main problem is well us. Co2 is a gas and gases do not hold heat.
Co2 is transferring the heat into liquids and solids. The reason for global warming is simply because of our cities and roads. They become heat sinks for the Co2 to transfer it's heat energy into. This heat is then put into a solid or liquid and more and more water is being evaporated trying to cool the planet. The Ice caps are melting trying to cool the planet down.
If we had the same amount of co2 that we have now back before we had these huge heat sinks(cities) on our planet we would of been fine.
Concrete is basically the biggest player in global warming. It just soaks up the heat from the sun and thanks to Co2 the heat can be easily transfered into delicate plants and the ground and lakes, rivers, and basically anything holding water. Causing the water to evaporate where it needs to be and then once the water is gone the dirt will even start to hold the heat.
Eventually the ground around the plants will not be able to hold water because the water is being evaporated from the dirt. Eventually the plants will have no water and they will die and then we will die if we don't change.
We have become to reliant on transportation via roads. Roads hold a lot of heat. Thanks to equalization the heat cant stay in the concrete and must be cooled to match the surrounding area.
We might be able to save ourselves if we made it easier on the planet to cool by making a channeling system. If we made channels from the ocean that went city to city it would help a lot in the equalization process of temperatures. (No Concrete!)
Basically if we dont make channels were our cities lay will become deserts.
Last edited by Klippymitch; 08-29-07 at 07:14 PM.
It is not only the Co2 it is also the Co, SOX and NOX! All together they will add up to NOX our SOX off not to mention all the other compounds they form!
Also methane and fluorocarbons.
thou art wise oJjames R
Uh, yeah they do.
Originally Posted by Klippymitch
Originally Posted by GuessWho
first, you have assumed that CO2 is the only greenhouse gas when in fact it's only one of many.
second, you have put a political spin on this thread.
Last edited by cat2only; 08-30-07 at 04:53 PM.
thou art wise oJjames R
At some point, seawater will become too warm to contain oxygen and lead to blooms of toxic pink algae.
NASA Scientists Confirm Toxic Seas During Earth's Evolution
Correct: Then the fish die! Then we die soon after! Red tide is a very serious issue!
However,here is another tidbit of information as Co2 levels rise the oceans absorb more Co2 thus creating more carbonic acid like in you soda pops! This is highly toxic to shell fish and they also die. If they die then the fish also die! Then we die soon after!