H2O Reduces CO2 Climate Sensitivity

Science Matters

Francis Massen writes at his blog meteoLCD on The Kauppinen papers, summarizing and linking to studies by Dr Jyrki Kauppinen (Turku University in Finland) regarding the climate sensitivity problem. Excerpts in italics with my bolds

Dr. Jyrki Kauppinen (et al.) has published during the last decade several papers on the problem of finding the climate sensitivity (List with links at end). All these papers are, at least for big parts, heavy on mathematics, even if parts thereof are not too difficult to grasp. Let me try to summarize in layman’s words (if possible):

The authors remember that the IPCC models trying to deliver an estimate for ECS or TCR usually take the relative humidity of the atmosphere as constant, and practically restrict to allowing one major cause leading to a global temperature change: the change of the radiative forcing Q. Many factors can change Q, but overall the IPCC…

View original post 816 more words

3 thoughts on “H2O Reduces CO2 Climate Sensitivity

  1. I have long held the view that water provides a NEGATIVE feedback to the greenhouse effect, based on it’s thermodynamic properties. IMO attempts to prove this through statistical analysis of the climate is very difficult due to the large variables involved.

    The GHE energy is small at circa 1.6 Watts/sq.m whereas the evaporation process of water (phase change) is large at some 680 Watts/sq.m. (here I roughly equate 1 kg of water to 1 sq.m).
    Phase Change occurs at constant temperature; thus in the simple Planck equation dF = K*dT the coefficient “K” tends to zero, with this coefficient influencing the Sensitivity at the global level.
    Water occupies around 4% of the atmosphere and is constantly indulging in the phase change process; thus this zero coefficient MUST be incorporated into any calculation of Climate Sensitivity if accuracy is required. I do not think that this has been done in the mainstream computer models, evidenced by the current variance between modelled and observed results.
    The other thermodynamic property of water of relevance here is the buoyancy of water vapor wrt dry air. This generates strong upward forces carrying the Latent Heat physically up through the atmosphere (and CO2) for dissipation partly to space irrespective of the radiation process.
    The above movement is different to that of thermal convection as no temperature differential is involved and I note that these often gets confabulated both in the consensus and sceptical papers; which indicates that there is an overall omission in the scientific logic.

    Overall I suggest that the above goes a long way to explain why the consensus Climate Sensitivity is so high and why the models are running too hot.

    Would appreciate feedback.
    Regards to all

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes indeed Hifast.
      Sadly the models are currently locked into the particular mindset of CO2 and radiation so cannot deal with the behaviour of water because it does not fit the algorithms.
      One interesting fact which has escaped them is that in a closed thermodynamic system comprising water, maintained at constant pressure, an increase in thermal input produces an equivalent output; WITHOUT any increase in temperature.

      Our steam generating plants do that every day.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s