5 ms·

Greening would be a darkening of the albedo, compared to the light blue of Caribbean waters, helping to absorb light and increase global warming... wouldn't it?

pshirshov 3y ago
Should be no significant difference: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/Solar_spectrum_en.svg/280px-Solar_spectrum_en.svg.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/So...
- daveguy 3y ago
  Excellent response! But I'd like to point out that the curve around the lower wavelengths in the absorbance spectrum is less than 1 W/m^2/nm whereas in the middle of the spectrum it is closer to 1.3 W/m^2/nm (according to your source) ... I would say a 30% increase is significant. To be clear I wasn't saying anything about the net impact to global warming. I'm sure the CO2 capture by increased algae is also significant (maybe/likely more). I was only referring to the electromagnetic absorbance variable.
nomel 3y ago
It’s a system, so you can’t just look at one parameter in isolation. 50% of our oxygen comes from the ocean, which also means it’s the single largest carbon sink on the planet [1]. Darker, but also an improvement to one of the primary drivers for why CO2 is near the lowest it’s ever been [2]. [1] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/oceans-absorb-carbon-seas-climate-change-environment-water-co2/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/oceans-absorb-carbon-... [2] http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/virtualmuseum/images/CO2History.html http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/virtualmuseum/images/CO2History.h...
- Paul-Craft 3y ago
  Excuse me? Lowest it's ever been? Your graph is extremely misleading. Why don't we try this graph on for size instead? https://www.climate.gov/media/14596 https://www.climate.gov/media/14596 Or maybe the one here, which goes back many millions of years? https://earth.org/data_visualization/a-brief-history-of-co2/ https://earth.org/data_visualization/a-brief-history-of-co2/
- daveguy 3y ago
  I was referring to the albedo of two different colors. Specifically absorbance of the electromagnetic spectrum being the opposite of what was stated by the GP. I'm not sure why you felt the need to bring up completely unrelated factors. Yes, I understand that one factor could easily be countered by others. That wasn't the point.

pshirshov 3y ago

Should be no significant difference: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/Solar_spectrum_en.svg/280px-Solar_spectrum_en.svg.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/So...

daveguy 3y ago
Excellent response! But I'd like to point out that the curve around the lower wavelengths in the absorbance spectrum is less than 1 W/m^2/nm whereas in the middle of the spectrum it is closer to 1.3 W/m^2/nm (according to your source) ... I would say a 30% increase is significant. To be clear I wasn't saying anything about the net impact to global warming. I'm sure the CO2 capture by increased algae is also significant (maybe/likely more). I was only referring to the electromagnetic absorbance variable.

nomel 3y ago

It’s a system, so you can’t just look at one parameter in isolation. 50% of our oxygen comes from the ocean, which also means it’s the single largest carbon sink on the planet [1]. Darker, but also an improvement to one of the primary drivers for why CO2 is near the lowest it’s ever been [2]. [1] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/oceans-absorb-carbon-seas-climate-change-environment-water-co2/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/oceans-absorb-carbon-... [2] http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/virtualmuseum/images/CO2History.html http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/virtualmuseum/images/CO2History.h...

Paul-Craft 3y ago
Excuse me? Lowest it's ever been? Your graph is extremely misleading. Why don't we try this graph on for size instead? https://www.climate.gov/media/14596 https://www.climate.gov/media/14596 Or maybe the one here, which goes back many millions of years? https://earth.org/data_visualization/a-brief-history-of-co2/ https://earth.org/data_visualization/a-brief-history-of-co2/
daveguy 3y ago
I was referring to the albedo of two different colors. Specifically absorbance of the electromagnetic spectrum being the opposite of what was stated by the GP. I'm not sure why you felt the need to bring up completely unrelated factors. Yes, I understand that one factor could easily be countered by others. That wasn't the point.