3 ms·
If we were truly concerned, we should work on eliminating water vapor, since that accounts for much more of the greenhouse effect than carbon dioxide. Or, pump
by yters 8y ago
If we were truly concerned, we should work on eliminating water vapor, since that accounts for much more of the greenhouse effect than carbon dioxide.
Or, pump out even more carbon dioxide to increase the warming and water vapor, and hence increase cloud cover to cool the earth.
- ilove_banh_mi 8y agoProvocatively worded... but intriguing from an engineering POV: if it is too late to limit CO2 levels and return to pre-industrial levels, what levers do we have to control water vapor levels?
- yongjik 8y agoNothing. Water vapor is always in equilibrium with oceans on the timescale of weeks. In other words, any excessive water vapor you manage to put into the atmosphere will simply rain down. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/04/water-vapour-feedback-or-forcing/ http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/04/water-...
- ilove_banh_mi 8y agoNot so fast, please. The very link you provide refers to the Pinatubo eruption that caused a significant multi-year cooling. It is well-known that cloud albedo changes in response to the addition of aerosols, which ultimately changes cloud water content (rapidly adjusting equilibrium with changes in global sea-surface temperature). Thus, there is at least one lever of action that we know of.