Curious as to how CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

[Sauwan]

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/04/learning-from-a-simple-model/

It says "simple" and even for someone like myself who has taken a relatively good understanding of heat transfer phenomena, this is borderline complex. I guess that just gives you a greater respect for the issue at hand and why they can't perfect it. I expect little response due to the overwhelming scientific nature of the article; it contains no mention of Gore, consensus, or any of the other talking points the skeptics rely on.

 

[jfuh]

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/04/learning-from-a-simple-model/

It says "simple" and even for someone like myself who has taken a relatively good understanding of heat transfer phenomena, this is borderline complex. I guess that just gives you a greater respect for the issue at hand and why they can't perfect it. I expect little response due to the overwhelming scientific nature of the article; it contains no mention of Gore, consensus, or any of the other talking points the skeptics rely on.

Vibrational, translation and rotational motions of the molecular bonds within CO2 are easily excited by the energy from long wavelength IR radiation very efficiently - thus effectively "retaining" the energy.
Very similar to how a microwave heats food.

 

[Sauwan]

Vibrational, translation and rotational motions of the molecular bonds within CO2 are easily excited by the energy from long wavelength IR radiation very efficiently - thus effectively "retaining" the energy.
Very similar to how a microwave heats food.

Well the article has more to do with the emissivity of our atmosphere as less to do with the actual CO2 response...

 

[Heretic]

Perhaps the EPA can explain it better?

 

[jfuh]

Well the article has more to do with the emissivity of our atmosphere as less to do with the actual CO2 response...

The article you posted didn't work for me oddly. So I responded best as I could. The nature of CO2 and how it "insulates".

 

[Australianlibertarian]

RealClimate » Learning from a simple model

It says "simple" and even for someone like myself who has taken a relatively good understanding of heat transfer phenomena, this is borderline complex. I guess that just gives you a greater respect for the issue at hand and why they can't perfect it. I expect little response due to the overwhelming scientific nature of the article; it contains no mention of Gore, consensus, or any of the other talking points the skeptics rely on.

At the end of the article it suggests that this simple formula does not take into account clouds, or convection. It doesn't take into account negative feedback from photosynthesis. In esscence it proves that CO2 can act as a green house gas when 'excited' by specific wavelengths of infra-red radiation. It does not take into account the complexities of our biosphere full stop.

Thank you for posting that link though, because the formula also shows the ability of CO2 to radiate heat will vary depending on solar activity.