Two Green House Effects

Many arguments against the anthropogenic cause of global warming (AGW) have been published, but the fundamental issue, i.e., the greenhouse effect has not been critically examined, it seems. The narrative on the greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide and the like seems to have become an unquestionable truth: cultism. Even those who argue that CO2 is not the cause of global warming seem not to deny the greenhouse effect of CO2 and the others. They deny the narrative, by pointing out that no correlation has been observed between atmospheric temperature and CO2 concentration over the last million years, that the narrative tends to ignore true data, particularly with solar activities, and that CO2 is beneficial for plant growth and others, rather than the polluter. In these arguments, the true nature of the so-called Green House Effect is not strictly defined. The greenhouse effect according to the cult is that CO2 (and other so-called GHG’s) absorbs IR (heat) energy coming out from the surface of the earth. The greenhouse gases do, indeed, absorb the IR intramolecularly, but absorb only minimal portions of the IR emitted by the global surface. Besides, the major greenhouse gas that absorbs the IR intramolecularly is water vapor which contributes about 95% of the greenhouse effect GHE-1. CO2’s effect is only a few % or so of the overall Arrhenius type greenhouse effect (GHE). Half of the IR energy by emitted by GHG’s will be returned toward the earth surface, and the half will leave upward, and hence CO2 captures half of leaving heat from the earth’s surface, and thus contributes to global warming. Let us call this effect “GHE-1”. Is this what we observe in our “greenhouse” (of real life)? Sunlight comes through glass window, and warms the solid material, and the heated solids release heat (IR), which warms the gas in the greenhouse; how. Heat simply increases the motions of the gaseous molecules; and its effect is the increase in the temperature of the gas. The IR portion of the coming-in sunlight excites the gas in the house, contributing to warming as well, though. The gas in the ordinary greenhouse is essentially air consisting of nitrogen and oxygen molecules. They cannot absorb IR, and simply become faster in their movement due to the heat. This warming effect is simply kinetic effect; not IR-absorption caused by intramolecular movements. Besides, the real-life greenhouse is enclosed so that the heated air remains in and the temperature rises. How about the open atmosphere? How would the heat from the earth surface be retained, by GHE-1? The official narrative has been mentioned above. GHE-1’s work on limited areas of the leaving IR and, besides, the quantity of heat (IR) restrained by each GH-gas is relatively small, insufficient to retain the leaving heat (IR). So, the GHE-1 does not seem to be enough to keep our atmosphere warm. As mentioned above, the warming in the real greenhouse seems to be reflection of the increase of molecular movements of molecules in the gas. The main components of the gas are nitrogen and oxygen molecules, both of which do not absorb IR. The warming of the greenhouse is actually caused by the fact that the air remains inside because it is enclosed. How about the open atmosphere? Dr. Thomas Allmendinger showed by experimental study that the temperature of the atmosphere is maintained by the thermal movements of the main components (N2 and O2 molecules), and has little to do with IR absorption by CO2 [1]. Let’s take a look at how the heat emitted from the earth surface moves up through the atmosphere. Heat emitted from the surface intensifies the movements of the molecules in the atmosphere. The more intense movement of molecules is reflected in the higher temperature of the gas. That is, the air is heated up by the heat from the earth surface. But, that heat moves further up and leaves the atmosphere portion which has been warmed. Heat keeps coming up from below, and so the atmosphere is kept being heated from below but losing heat to higher level. At a certain height, heats coming from below and heat leaving up become the same, and hence the temperature at that height becomes steady. Thomas Allmendinger [1] showed experimentally that the steady state temperature at a certain height is dependent on the pressure and the mass of the material in the atmosphere. He tried different gases as atmosphere and see what determines the steady state temperature. He tried Helium(He), Neon(Ne), Air (N2 + O2), Argon(Ar), CO2, as each gas at 1 atm pressure was heated at a constant rate from below. These gaseous molecules cannot absorb IR except for CO2. The attained steady temperature under the same experimental condition was CO2>Ar>Air>Ne>He (as seen in Fig. 1). Well, is this due to GHE-1 of CO2? The fact is that the temperature of Ar is slightly low but about the same as that of CO2. Ar cannot absorb IR at all, but it accomplishes to attain about the same temperature as that of CO2. Why? The temperature attained seems to be dependent on the mass of the molecules in the gas. The molar masses are: CO2 44g/mole, Ar 40g/mole, Air 28.9, Ne 20, and He 4. This implies that the temperature attained is dependent on the movement of the molecules in the atmosphere; let’s call this “GHE-2”. This fact can be seen from another perspective. The temperature of lower portion of the troposphere is maintained through kinetic movements of molecules in atmosphere, because it has been shown to be governed by the ideal gas law: PV=nRT, where P=pressure, V=volume, n=number of moles ( in terms of mole), T=temperature and R=gas constant [2]. The temperature T can then be expressed by T=P/(R x ( where  is the density of the atmosphere and M is the molar mass of the molecules in the atmosphere. The temperature of the current earth’s atmosphere was calculated as 288.14 K= 150C according to this formula [2]. So the current overall average temperature of lower atmosphere is 15oC, and this temperature is maintained by N2 and O2 through GHE-2, i.e., their kinetic movements. The minor components H2O, CO2, CH4 and others contribute negligibly little in terms of GHE-2 . They may contribute in terms of GHE-1 as well, but again negligibly small amounts. Ian Plimer says: “Air itself is a good insulator” in his major work, indicating that “greenhouse effect (GHE-1) is a misnomer [3]. At high altitude where the atmospheric pressure becomes low, the GHE-1 becomes significant, as GHE-2 is reduced. One of the major claims for the CO2 GH effect (GHE-1) for the global warming is based on the fact that the temperature of the atmosphere of Venus is quite high 740 K, because it consists mostly of CO2. So it can be claimed that GHE-1 effect of CO2 maintains that high temperature. However, it was calculated to be 739.7 K based on the gas law PV=nRT [2]. This result implies that the Venus atmospheric temperature is maintained by the kinetic movement of the molecules (CO2) in its atmosphere (GHE-2), not IR-based GH effect (GHE-1). “Atmospheric Greenhouse Effect” described by N. Nicolov and K. Zelller based on a detailed study of atmospheric temperatures of some planets [4] seems to be what GHE-2 means. It can be summarized that in the atmosphere near ground the contribution to the global warming is maintained by the thermal kinetic movements of the major components N2 and O2 (GHE-2), and contribution by CO2 or other so-called greenhouse gases through either GHE-1 or GHE-2 is negligibly small, irrespective of natural or anthropogenic origin, because their concentrations in the atmosphere are negligibly small. Hence, the idea of the anthropogenic CO2 causing the global warming is basically mistaken, though GHE-1 may be contributing to temperature maintenance minimally in the lower part of troposphere. The most effective greenhouse gas based on IR absorption (GH-1), i.e., water contributes significantly to weather/temperature regulation through cloud formation as well. Reference [1] Thomas Allmendinger, The Real Cause of Global Warming and its Consequences on Climate Policy, SciFed Journal of Global Warming, 2018, 2:1; Thomas Allmendinger, The Refutation of the Climate Greenhouse Theory and a Proposal for a Hopeful Alternative, Environ. Pollut. Climate Change, 2017, 1:2; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317572928 [2] Robert Ian Holmes, Earth Sciences, 2017; 6(6): 157-163; 2018; 7: 107-123 https://doi.org/10.11648/j.earth.20170606.18 [3] Ian Plimer, “Heaven and Earth: global warming the missing science” (Taylor Trading Publishing., 2009) p365-367 [4] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317570648