Skip to main content
11 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Mar 17, 2019 at 19:42 history edited Camilo Rada
edited tags
Feb 19, 2019 at 22:01 answer added Camilo Rada timeline score: 6
Feb 19, 2019 at 0:27 comment added elliot svensson @DavidHammen, I just noticed that all the ice-related albedo ought to be discounted by the average incident angle of sunlight... it is not 340 W/m^2 outside an arctic or antarctic circle!
Feb 19, 2019 at 0:17 comment added elliot svensson @DavidHammen, also it sounds like oceans can move heat around geographically, and then send it back to space at the poles... that can't happen with terrestrial insolation.
Feb 19, 2019 at 0:12 comment added elliot svensson @DavidHammen, of course, there would be more area for interaction with dry air, and thus I suppose more evaporation (with sea level rise).
Feb 18, 2019 at 23:13 comment added elliot svensson @DavidHammen, it seems, too, that the iodine emissions in tidal waters have a non-trivial impact to cloud cover, so I wonder if that tends to increase or decrease under sea level rise.
Feb 18, 2019 at 21:32 comment added elliot svensson @DavidHammen then I suppose that water would also radiate into the clear sky well, especially when considering convection that maintains warmer surface temp through the night compared with earth or ice.
Feb 18, 2019 at 21:17 comment added elliot svensson I'm hoping for a generalized answer that somehow accounts for the W/m^2-difference, both for incident radiation and other forcings (like evaporation / ocean heat retention / ocean cloud & weather patterns etc).
Feb 18, 2019 at 20:30 comment added David Hammen Why would you think this? Water absorbs incoming radiation much better than does land, and much, much better than ice.
Feb 18, 2019 at 19:23 history edited elliot svensson CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 3 characters in body
Feb 18, 2019 at 18:54 history asked elliot svensson CC BY-SA 4.0