Page 1 of 1

Alt views on greenhouse gases absorption of longwave EMF

PostPosted: November 29th, 2019, 2:12 pm
by TheVat
The disappointing aspect of our current climate change action to my mind, is that to date I have been unable to find any studies on the properties of carbon dioxide as an absorber and radiator of IR since the initial primitive experiments of Tyndall circa 1860. This is in spite of the fact that virtually every university in the world has the equipment to do such experiments and in spite of the fact that our entire global thrust to date against global warming is based on the hypothesis that the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere is the only way we can save the world.

If you are interested, Sherwood Idso has had hundreds of papers published on atmospheric science. This paper by him is worth a look -- Idso (1998; CO2-induced global warming: a skeptic’s view of potential climate change summarises the results of a number of experiments, as distinct from models. His Abstract reads -- "Over the course of the past 2 decades, I have analyzed a number of natural phenomena that reveal how Earth’s near-surface air temperature responds to surface radiative perturbations. These studies all suggest that a 300 to 600 ppm doubling of the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration could raise the planet’s mean surface air temperature by only about 0.4°C. Even this modicum of warming may never be realized, however, for it could be negated by a number of planetary cooling forces that are intensified by warmer temperatures and by the strengthening of biological processes that are enhanced by the same rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration that drives the warming. Several of these cooling forces have individually been estimated to be of equivalent magnitude, but of opposite sign, to the typically predicted greenhouse effect of a doubling of the air’s CO2 content, which suggests to me that little net temperature change will ultimately result from the ongoing buildup of CO2 in Earth’s atmosphere. Consequently, I am skeptical of the predictions of significant CO2-induced global warming that are being made by state-of-the-art climate models and believe that much more work on a wide variety of research fronts will be required to properly resolve the issue."

Unfortunately, very little has been done by our climate scientists 'on a wide variety of research fronts'. After 23 years of attempting to reduce carbon dioxide, no attempt has been made to evaluate the success or otherwise of that approach to Climate Change.
-- quoted from Doogles, in another thread. These comments moved here to create a new thread on alt views.

Here, from another thread, is a look at some of the research that has in fact been done on CO2 as an absorber of longwave (IR, in this context) radiation.

(relevant passage quoted below)

You seem to be particularly interested in laboratory experiments on carbon dioxide absorption. As an excellent starting point, I can recommend the (currently) 26 publications in AGW Observer's list of papers on laboratory measurements of CO2 absorption properties.

If you're really keen to see experimental confirmation that CO2 can still absorb radiation even at atmospheric concentrations, you could take a look at (for example) Taylor and Yates (1957), Yates and Taylor (1960), or Streete (1968), all of which clearly demonstrate that CO2 absorption bands are present in normal atmospheric air.

As an aside: personally I find find that the numerous spectroscopic observations of the whole atmospheric column -- from satellites or ground stations -- provide a more compelling demonstration of the greenhouse effect. After all, the atmosphere isn't a homogeneous bottle of gas that can be faithfully scaled down into a lab sample. But your question and subsequent comments indicate that you're not interested in measurements of the atmospheric column itself, so here I'm just concentrating on ground-level experiments which demonstrate the long-wave absorption properties of CO2.