Physics & Climate
a) Greenhouse Effect
Preliminary Comments
Fossil
fuel
emissions
are
made
responsible
for
a
climate
emergency
with
catastrophic
conse
-
quences
for
our
planet,
when
worldwide
anthropogenic
emissions
are
not
rapidly
stopped.
The
basis
of
these
forecasts
is
the
atmospheric
Greenhouse
Effect
(GHE),
which
goes
back
to
Jean-Baptiste
Joseph
Fourier
in
1824
[1],
who
was
studying
the
Earth's
energy
budget
to
ex
-
plain
the
surface
temperature.
He
assumed
that
the
atmosphere
is
acting
similar
to
a
glass
window,
transparent
for
the
solar
radiation
but
blocking
the
infrared
(IR)-radiation
emitted
from
the
ground.
Heat
exchange
with
the
environment
by
convection
or
heat
conduction
was
largely neglected in this model.
However,
up
to
now
even
many
climate
experts
do
not
care
or
try
to
understand,
how
green
-
house
gases
(GH-gases)
are
really
affecting
our
climate.
Often
this
leads
to
dramatic
misinter
-
preta
tions
in
popular
reviews
and
even
in
the
Summary
for
Policymakers
(IPCC‘s
6th
assess
-
ment
re
port
AR6
[2]).
On
the
other
hand,
for
people
with
a
clear
feeling
and
understanding
of
real
physical
facts
these
exaggerations
end
in
strong
doubts
about
a
man-made
climate
change
and
about
the
existence
of
the
greenhouse
effect,
which
is
almost
exclusively
based
on
theoretical facts.
The
main
reason
of
these
doubts
is
a
missing
retraceable
verification
of
the
GHE,
although
there
were
continuous
trials
over
the
last
120
years
to
confirm
or
to
refute
this
effect
by
more
or
less
simple
laboratory
experiments.
Direct
measurements
at
the
atmosphere
are
too
strongly
affected
by
convection,
turbulence
or
scattering
effects
to
quantify
the
relatively
small
contri
bution
of
greenhouse
molecules
to
any
local
warming
of
the
air
or
the
Earth's
surface,
which is dominated by day-night and seasonal cycles with local variations of 60°C or more.
Some Historical Notes
One
of
the
frontier
experimental
investigations
was
performed
by
R.
W.
Wood
(1909)
[3],
who
used
two
boxes
containing
regular
air.
One
box
was
covered
with
a
glass
window
transparent
for
sun
light,
but
blocking
IR-radiation,
the
other
covered
with
a
NaCl
window
transparent
also
for
IR.
His
measurements
showed
significant
warming
of
the
interior
but
no
or
only
a
negli
gi
ble
temperature
difference
between
the
boxes.
From
this
Wood
and
other
authors
repeating
his
experiment
(e.g.,
Allmendinger
2006
[4],
Nahle
2011
[5])
concluded
that
infra
-
red
radiation,
which
can
escape
through
the
NaCl
win
dow,
will
not
contribute
to
heating
or
only
with
an
insigni
ficant
amount,
while
the
observed
temperature
increase
in
both
boxes
-
different
to
Fourier's
interpretation
-
is
exclusive
ly
explained
due
to
the
blockage
of
convective
heat
transfer
with
the
environment
and
not
related
to
any
kind
of
trapped
radiation.
But
experiments
recording
the
temperature
at
the
floor
and
ceiling
of
the
interior,
rather
than
looking
only
to
a
single
temperature
for
each
box,
measure
a
5°C
larger
floor
to
ceiling
decline
for
the
salt
rock
box
than
the
glass
box,
while
the
bottom
of
the
boxes
have
almost
identical
temperatures
(V.
R.
Pratt
2020
[6]).
These
results
are
prin
-
cipally
confirmed
with
a
slightly
different
set-up
using
an
internal
electric
heating
instead
of
external
light
sources
(E.
Loock
2008
[7]).
Such
heating
avoids
differences
in
the
incident
radiation,
which
otherwise
has
to
transmit
windows
of
different
materials
and
losses.
A
higher
temperature
of
2.5
-
3°C
could
be
found
for
the
glass
box,
and
replacing
the
glass
by
a
polished aluminum foil the temperature even rises by additional ~ 3°C.
While
the
Wood-type
experiments
can
answer
the
question,
if
and
how
far
a
reduced
IR-
transmissivity
can
contribute
to
warming
of
a
compartment,
respectively
the
troposphere,
it
gives
no
information
about
the
interaction
of
greenhouse
gases
with
IR-radiation.
Thus,
it
still
remained
the
question,
to
which
extent
such
gases
at
least
partially
can
withhold
IR-radiation
and
how
far
simple
absorption
by
GH-gases
or
the
highly
disputed
back-radiation
might
contribute
to
additional
warming
of
the
floor.
Such
studies
require
to
fill
one
compartment
with
the
gas
to
be
investigated
and
to
compare
this
with
a
reference
measurement
using
air
or
a noble gas.
Meanwhile
different
approaches
have
been
carried
out,
partly
with
external
irradiation
or
with
internal
heating
(see
e.g.,
Loock
[7]),
partly
measuring
the
gas
temperature
or
the
IR
radiation
in
forward
and
backward
direction
(
Seim&Olsen
2020
[8]).
But
either
no
warming
was
detec
ted
or,
after
closer
inspection,
the
observed
temperature
increase
could
not
be
attributed
to
an
IR-
radiation effect.
Unfortunately
some
fake
demonstrations
with
apparent
temperature
differences
of
more
than
10°C
are
presented
in
the
internet,
which
allegedly
reveal
the
strong
impact
of
the
greenhouse
gases
(see,
e.g.,
Ditfurth
1978
[9]).
However,
closer
inspection
shows
that
the
higher
tempera
-
ture
is
mainly
caused
by
a
stratification
effect
combined
with
an
increased
isolation,
when
heavier
CO
2
is
filled
from
the
bottom
into
the
compartment
(M.
Schnell
2020
[10]).
And
really
problematic
is,
when
the
co-recipient
of
the
2007
Nobel
Peace
Prize
initiates
a
web-based
campaign
with
multiple
advertisements
on
television,
focused
on
spreading
awareness
for
a
climate
crisis,
and
as
"evidence"
presents
a
completely
unrealistic
and
unreproducible
video
experiment
of
the
GHE
(
Al
Gore's
Climate
101
video
experiment
2001
[11]),
which
meanwhile
has
been
falsified
by
several
revisions
(
Watts
2011
[12],
Solheim
2016
[13]).
It
is
a
dirty
pro
-
paganda
using
such
a
manipulated
experiment
to
spread
fear
around
the
word
and
to
indoctrinate
our
society
with
the
message
that
we
can
only
rescue
our
Earth
by
stopping
all
future
emissions
of
greenhouse
gases.
Such
kind
of
demonstrations
undermines
any
serious
attempts
to
discuss
and
analyze
the
expected
influence
of
GH-gases
on
our
climate.
Political
imaginations,
speculations
or
religious
faith
are
no
serious
consultants
to
ensure
a
prosperous
future; our knowledge and technical progress is based on scientific principles.
Objective of our Studies
It‘s
high
time
to
stop
the
endless
speculations
about
the
disastrous
implications
or
the
non-
existence
of
an
atmospheric
GHE
and
to
concentrate
on
reliable
investigations,
which
allow
to
quantify
the
size
and
limiting
impact
of
GH-gases
on
global
warming
caused
by
anthropogenic
emissions of fossil fuels.
In
an
actual
study
we
have
summarized
the
theoretical
background
of
the
GHE
and
for
the
first
time present quantitative measurements for the GH-gases CO
2
, CH
4
and N
2
O with an advanced
experi
men
tal
set-up,
which
has
been
developed
by
Michael
Schnell
and
allows
measurements
under similar conditions as in the lower troposphere (
Harde & Schnell 2022
[14]). A shortened,
less
technical
version
can
be
downloaded
as
PDF
in
English
or
in
German
[15].
Here
we
present a brief review of our main investigations and results.
Experimental Set-Up
Different
to
other
experiments
we
use
two
plates
in
a
closed
housing,
an
upper
plate,
called
earth-plate,
which
is
heated
to
30°C,
and
a
cooled
plate
at
the
bottom,
stabilized
to
-11.4°C
(at
-
mospheric
plate,
atm-plate).
Their
distance
is
111
cm.
No
additional
light
sources
in
the
visible
or
IR
are
used,
only
the
radia
tion
emitted
by
the
two
plates
and
interact
ing
with the gases is considered.
This
simulates
conditions
for
the
radiation
exchange
similar
to
the
Earth-Atmos
phere-
System
(EASy)
with
the
war
mer
Earth's
surface
and
the
colder
atmos
phere.
It
also
avoids
any
problems
caused
by
an
inapprop
-
riate
spectral
range
of
an
external
source,
which
produces
a
lot
of
waste
heat
in
the
compartment
and
the
windows,
but
is
not
well
matched
to
the
absorption
bands
of
the
GH-gases,
and
thus
significantly
reduces
the
measurement sensi
tivity.
With
the
sample
gas
in
the
tank
the
heated
earth-plate
acts
simultaneously
as
radiation
source
and
as
sensitive
detector
for
the
back-radiation
from
GH-gases.
In
this
way,
the
pure
radiation
effect
of
the
gases
is
measured
as
a
direct
temperature
increase
of
the
upper
plate
or,
alterna
-
tively at stabilized temperature, as energy saving of the plate heating.
This
set-up
allows
to
a
large
extent
to
eliminate
convection
or
heat
conduction
and
to
repro
-
ducibly
study
the
direct
influence
of
GH-gases
under
similar
conditions
as
in
the
lower
tropo
-
sphere.
Any
noticeable
impact
due
to
heat
conduction
can
be
excluded
by
control
experiments
with noble gases.
Some Physical Basics
Spectral Absorption and Emission
In
good
approximation
can
the
Earth's
surface,
or
here
the
black
colored
earth-plate
and
also
the
atm-plate,
be
assumed
to
radiate
as
black
bodies
with
a
Planck
distribution,
which
is
only
controlled
by
the
temperature
of
the
body.
On
a
wavelength
scale
the
respective
spectrum
extends
from
about
4
µm
up
to
the
cm
range,
or
in
reciprocal
wavelengths
1/
as
wavenum
-
bers (units
: cm
-1
) from 10 to 2,500 cm
-1
.
This
Figure
displays
the
emitted
spectrum
of
the
earth-plate
for
T
E
=
30°C
(Red)
and
the
atm-
plate
at
T
A
=
-11.4°C
(Blue).
Different
to
nitrogen,
oxygen
or
the
noble
gases,
the
GH-gases
can
absorb and emit radiation in this spectral range.
For
CO
2
,
e.g.,
the
dominating
interaction
takes
place
on
the
ro-vibronic
transitions
of
the
bending
mode
around
670
cm
-1
(15
µm).
Due
to
this
interaction
the
net
result
for
radiation
propagating
from
the
warm
to
the
cold
plate
is
that
the
spectral
intensity
over
the
absorption
band
is
attenuated
(but
far
from
opacity),
while
radiation
in
backward
direction
(to
the
earth-
plate)
is
further
'amplified'.
A
calculation
for
the
latter
case
and
for
20%
CO
2
in
dry
air
over
111
cm
is
shown
as
Plum
Area.
The
additional
emission
of
CO
2
can
well
be
identified
as
a
larger
peak
around
670
cm
-1
(Plum-Gray).
On
the
stronger
lines
at
the
band
center
the
gas
emission
already
attains
saturation
with
spectral
intensities,
which
are
the
same
as
those
emitted
by
the
earth-plate (Red Line) in this spectral range.
Such
calculation
considers
a
continuous
absorption-emission
sequence
for
the
propagating
radiation
and
is
known
as
Radiation
Transfer
calculation
(RT-calculation
using
the
Schwarz
-
schild equation).
Compared
to
the
total
radiated
intensity
of
the
atm-plate
with
I
A
=
266
W/m
2
the
back-radiation
increases
by
24.2
W/m
2
,
which
is
9.1%.
This
larger
back-radiation
is
almost
identical
to
the
losses
in
forward
direction
(see
Short
Version
,
Fig.
3)
so
that
within
observational
accuracies
the
total
balance
of
absorption
and
emission
of
the
gas
is
zero.
This
is
an
important
aspect
that speaks against measuring the gas temperature to prove the GHE.
On
the
other
hand,
with
the
presented
set-up
the
back-radiation
of
the
GH-gases
can
well
be
detected as a temperature rise of the earth-plate.
Objections against the Greenhouse Effect
One
of
the
most
common
objections
against
the
GHE
is
that
GH-gases
would
not
emit
in
the
lower
atmosphere,
while
they
are
good
emitters
in
the
tropopause
and
stratosphere.
As
explanation
critics
state
that
in
the
lower
troposphere
collision
processes
with
nitrogen
and
oxygen
suppress
any
spontaneous
emission
and
the
absorbed
energy
is
only
converted
into
kinetic energy and thus into heat.
Unfortunately
such
interpretation
overlooks
that
the
typical
collision
rates
of
several
GHz,
as
observed
in
the
lower
atmosphere,
are
only
reducing
by
a
factor
of
4
-
5
at
an
altitude
of
11
km
and
therefore
are
still
some
100
million
times
larger
than
the
spontaneous
transition
rate
on
the
CO
2
bending
mode
(~1
Hz).
When
such
interpretation
would
be
true,
there
would
also
be
absolutely no emission in the higher atmosphere.
Instead
continuous
emission
even
without
prior
absorption
of
an
IR
light
quantum
occurs,
because
in
addition
to
superelastic
collisions
(collision-induced
transitions
from
a
higher
to
a
lower
molecular
state)
also
inelastic
collisions
take
place,
which
remove
kinetic
energy
from
the
gas
mixture
and
convert
it
back
to
excite
the
GH-gas
molecules
(
Harde
2013
[16],
Subsec.
2.3).
Thus,
lower-lying
energy
levels
are
continuously
re-populated,
when
there
is
sufficient
thermal
energy,
and
spontaneous
emission
occurs
largely
independently
-
parallel
to
superela
-
stic
collisions
-
as
thermal
back-ground
radiation
(
Harde
2013
[16],
Subsec.
2.5).
This
emis
sion
is
controlled
by
the
temperature
of
the
air
and
is
the
main
reason
that
with
increasing
altitude
the
radiated
intensity
is
significantly
decreasing.
So,
at
an
altitude
of
11
km
for
CO
2
,
e.g.,
it
is
just 12% of the intensity observed in a 100 m thick gas layer close to the ground.
Collisions
(adiabatic
and
diabatic)
are
primarily
noticeable
as
spectral
broadening
of
the
lines.
But
on
these
frequencies
and
over
longer
pathlengths
the
radiation
can
achieve
the
same
strength
as
a
blackbody
radiator,
and
at
thermal
equilibrium
this
is
mainly
controlled
by
the
gas temperature T
G
.
Another
objection
is
that
the
radiation
from
a
cooler
body
cannot
be
absorbed
by
a
warmer
body,
as
this
would
violate
the
2nd
law
of
thermodynamics.
A
simple
measurement,
in
which
the
temperature
of
the
atm-plate
is
gradually
increased
and
the
warming
of
the
earth-plate
or
its
reduced
heating
capacity
is
measured,
gives
clear
evidence
of
a
wrong
interpretation
of
this
law,
which
explicitly
includes
"
simultaneous
double
heat
exchange
by
radiation
"
(Clausius).
In
a
closed
system,
"
the
colder
body
experiences
an
increase
in
heat
at
the
expense
of
the
warmer
body
",
which
in
turn
experiences
a
slower
rate
of
cooling.
In
an
open
system
with
external
heating,
the
back-radiation
from
the
cooler
body
clearly
leads
to
a
higher
temperature
of
the
warmer body than without this radiation (
Short Version
, Fig. 4).
From
such
measurement
also
the
radiation
loss
caused
by
divergence
and
reflection
at
the
side
walls
can
be
determined.
At
the
same
time,
the
observed
temperature
increase
as
a
function
of
the
heating
power
provides
a
calibration
for
the
temperature
response
sensitivity
of the earth-plate.
Measurements
We
have
investigated
the
GH-gases
CO
2
,
CH
4
and
N
2
O
over
a
wide
range
of
concentration
changes
up
to
a
factor
of
16.
Our
measurements
show
a
clear
response
to
the
GH-gases
but
also
a
strong
saturation
in
the
temperature
in
cline
with
increasing
concentration,
and
they
are
in excellent agreement with detailed RT-calculations.
CO
2
-Measurement
Figure
a)
displays
the
measured
tem
perature
increase
D
T
E
at
the
earth-plate
as
a
function
of
the
CO
2
-con
centration
in
dry
air,
which
was
stepwise
increased
from
1.25%
up
to
20%
(Blue
Dia
monds)
.
As
direct
comparison
is
also
plotted
the
cal
cula
ted
temperature
increase
T
C
=
E
f
CO2
I
CO2
(Ma
genta
Squa
res),
based
on
an
RT-calcu
lation
of
the
CO
2
back-radi
ation
D
I
CO2
(Green
Tri
an
-
gles),
only
multi
plied
by
a
calibration
fac
tor
(transmitted
fraction)
f
CO2
for
the
collected
radiation
(see
be
low)
and
the
separately
measured
tem
perature
response
l
E
of
the
earth-
plate.
Measurement and calculation are well re
presen
ted by a logarithmic plot of the form
T
E
=
E
f
CO2
F
CO2
ln(C
CO2
/C
0
)/ln2
(Brown
Crosses)
as
a
function
of
the
concentration
C
CO2
in
dry
air.
From
this
we
derive
the
CO
2
radiative
forcing
at
doubled
CO
2
concentration
of
F
2xCO2
=
3.7
W/m
2
.
The
lower
plot
b)
shows
the
saved
heating
H
E
for
the
earth-plate
(Blue
Diamonds)
when
stabi
-
lizing
this
plate
at
a
fixed
temperature
(30°C),
while
increasing
the
CO
2
concentration.
This
is
an
independent
means
for
detecting
the
back-radiation,
which
can
well
be
reproduced
by
the
calculated
back-radiation
D
I
CO2
times
the
transmitted
fraction
f
CO2
=
59%
that
reaches
the
plate
and is absorbed (Green). This fraction f
CO2
is derived from a fit to the saved heating
H
E
.
CH
4
-Measurement
Measurements
for
CH
4
were
per
formed
for
concentration
changes
from
1.25
to
10%
in
dry
air.
The
observed
temperature
increase
D
T
E
of
the
earth
plate
as
a
function
of
the
CH
4
concentra
-
tion
(Blue
Diamonds)
shows
again
excel
lent
agreement
with
the
calculated
tem
perature
increase (M
agenta Squares) based on the cal
culated back-radiation
D
I
CH4
(Green Tri
angles).
Except
for
the
lowest
concen
tration
also
this
GH-gas
indicates
strong
saturation
at
these
con
-
centration
levels
and
can
quite
well
be
represented
by
a
logarithmic
plot
(Brown
Crosses)
with
a
radiative
forcing
at
doubled
CH
4
concentration
of
D
F
2xCH4
=
2.75
W/m
2
.
Under
otherwise
comparable
conditions
this
is
only
74%
of
the
CO
2
forcing.
Although
the
atmospheric
concentration
of
CH
4
with
1.8
ppm
is
more
than
200x
smaller
than
CO
2
,
over
the
optical
path,
which
is
proportional
to
the
concentration
x
propaga
tion
length,
also
CH
4
shows
stronger
saturation in the atmosphere (see also:
).
N
2
O-Measurement
The
N
2
O
measurements
were
per
form
ed
for
concentrations
of
1.25%
up
to
15%.
The
recorded
temperature
change
T
E
of
the
earth
plate
with
increasing
N
2
O
concentration
(Blue
Diamonds)
can
again
well
be
reproduced
by
the
calculated
change
T
=
E
f
N2O
I
N2O
(Magenta
Squar
es).
The theore
tical N
2
O emission
I
N2O
is shown as Green Triangles.
The
measured
temperature
also
fits
well
to
a
logarithmic
curve
(Brown
Crosses)
and
gives
an
N
2
O
radiative
forcing
at
doubled
concentration
of
F
2xN2O
=
5.0
W/m
2
,
which
is
35%
greater
than the forcing of CO
2
.
Results
Differences to Atmosphere
The
experimental
set-up
has
proven
to
be
appropriate
for
demonstrating
the
atmospheric
GHE
in
the
laboratory.
Although
the
pathlength
through
the
atmosphere
is
about
a
factor
of
80,000
larger
than
in
the
tank,
this
is
partially
compensated
by
a
500x
higher
concentration
for
CO
2
,
a
50,000x
larger
CH
4
-concentration,
and
it
is
even
significantly
overcompensated
for
N
2
O
with
an
almost
500,000x
higher
concentration
relative
to
the
sea-level
values.
Not
so
much
the
absolute
values
are
relevant,
more
important
is
the
optical
depth,
which
scales
with
the
ab
-
sorption coefficient x pathlength.
Under
real
atmospheric
conditions
is
the
back-radiation
of
the
GH-gases
superimposed
by
the
much
broader
radiation
from
clouds,
which
in
first
approximation
can
be
assumed
as
gray
emitters with a temperature given by their bottom side, only with an emissivity < 1.
In
our
experiment
clouds
are
substituted
by
the
atm-plate
and
walls.
Their
radiation
is
strongly
changing
with
the
temperature
of
the
atm-plate
T
A
and
in
this
way
simulates
the
impact
of
clouds
at
different
heights.
But
it
also
affects
the
size
of
the
GH-gas
contribution,
which
depends
on
the
temperature
difference
between
the
plates
and
by
this
on
the
lapse-rate.
Transferred
to
the
atmosphere
this
means
that
with
clouds
the
back-radiation
is
larger
than
for clear sky, but the relative contribution caused by GH-gases is declining.
Comparison with Literature
We
find
good
agreement
between
measurement
and
calculation
for
all
three
gases,
this
for
the
temperature
data
as
well
as
for
the
plate
heating.
Particularly
the
increasing
saturation
and
the
characteristic
gradation
with
inclining
gas
concentration
is
well
confirmed
by
the
cal
-
culations
and
excludes
any
larger
impact
by
heat
conduction.
At
the
same
time
these
graphs
demonstrate
the
only
small
further
impact
on
global
warming
with
increasing
GH-gas
concen
-
trations.
While
the
coincidence
in
the
absolute
values
of
measured
and
calculated
data
to
some
part
is
a
consequence
of
using
the
theoretical
reference
for
deriving
f
G
as
scaling
factor
for
the
absorbed
back-radiation
and
the
temperature
plots,
is
the
almost
exact
agreement
of
the
derived
radiative
forcing
for
CO
2
with
F
2xCO2
=
3.70
W/m
2
more
an
unexpected
coincidence
with
the
literature
(see
AR6
[17]),
as
the
measurement
here
was
deduced
under
quite
different
conditions.
Nevertheless
allows
this
some
direct
comparison
with
each
other,
it
only
requires
to
consider
the
different
impacts
like
a
changing
pressure
broadening
of
the
absorption
lines
over
the
pathlength
in
the
atmosphere,
the
interference
with
other
GH-gases
like
water
vapor,
the
different
ground
temperature,
and
the
changing
back-radiation
with
varying
cloud
altitude,
overcast
and
emissivity.
From
this
we
calculate
a
radiative
forcing
of
F
2xCO2
=
3.4
W/m
2
,
and
to
-
gether
with
a
Planck
response
of
P
=
0.31
°C/(W/m
2
)
(see
AR6
[17])
this
gives
a
basic
Equili
-
brium
Climate
Sensitivity
(temperature
increase
at
doubled
CO
2
concentration,
without
feed
-
backs) of ECS
B
=
P
F
2xCO2
= 1.05°C.
This
result
is
in
excellent
agreement
with
the
Coupled
Model
Intercomparison
Project
Phase
5
(CMIP5).
However,
including
also
feedbacks,
own
calculations
show
that
in
contrast
to
the
assumptions
of
the
IPCC,
water
vapor
only
contributes
to
a
marginal
positive
feedback
and
evaporation
at
the
earth's
surface
even
leads
to
a
significant
further
reduction
of
the
climate
sensitivity
to
only
ECS
=
0.7°C
(
Harde
2017
[18]).
This
is
less
than
a
quarter
of
the
IPCC
value
with ECS = 3°C (
AR6
[17]) and 5.4x smaller than the mean value of CMIP6 with ECS = 3.78°C.
The
found
forcings
for
CH
4
and
N
2
O
can
only
indirectly
be
compared
with
the
literature,
as
respective
values
are
only
specified
for
a
concentration
range
(parts
per
billion)
before
satur
-
ation
is
observed.
Nevertheless
their
relative
values
to
CO
2
still
allow
a
direct
assessment
of
their
contribution
to
global
warming,
which
is
not
more
than
2%
for
CH
4
and
less
than
1%
for
N
2
O (see also
c) Methane
).
Conclusion
The
presented
measurements
and
calculations
clearly
confirm
the
existence
of
an
atmo
-
spheric
GHE,
and
they
demonstrate,
contrary
to
the
often
misinterpreted
2nd
law
of
thermo
-
dynamics,
that
a
warmer
body
can
further
be
heated
by
absorbing
the
radiation
from
a
colder
body,
here
the
radiation
from
the
cooled
plate
and
a
GH-gas.
They
also
confirm
that
GH-gases
are
still
emitting
IR-radiation
in
‘backward‘
direction
under
conditions
as
found
in
the
lower
atmosphere.
At
the
same
time
reveal
our
studies
the
principal
difficulties
to
measure
the
GH-effect
only
as
increasing
temperature
of
the
gas,
which
in
classical
set-ups
is
mainly
dominated
by
indirect
effects
like
heat
exchange
with
the
compartment
walls,
while
an
important
prerequisite
for
its
observation
is
missing:
The
GHE
is
mainly
the
result
of
a
temperature
difference
over
the
propa
-
gation path of the radiation and thus the lapse rate in the atmosphere
.
Our
results
only
show
a
small
impact
of
GH-gases
on
global
warming,
which
apparently
is
much
more
dominated
by
natural
impacts
like
solar
radiative
forcing
(see,
e.g.,
Connolly
et
al.
2021
[19];
Harde
2022
[20];
e)
Solar
Influence
).
So,
there
is
no
reason
for
panic
and
climate
emergency,
instead
it
is
high
time
to
come
back
to
a
consolidated
climate
discussion,
which
concentrates on facts and also includes the benefits of GH-gases.
References
1.
J. B. Fourier, 1824: Remarques Générales Sur Les Températures Du Globe Terrestre Et Des Espaces
Planétaires. In: Annales de Chimie et de Physique, Vol. 27, 1824, S. 136–167,
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=1Jg5AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA136&hl=pt-
BR&source=gbs_selected_pages#v=onepage&q&f=false
2.
IPCC, 2021: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribu-
tion of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
[Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani et al. (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, pp. 3−32,
doi:10.1017/9781009157896.001.
3.
R. W. Wood, 1909: Note on the Theory of the Greenhouse, London, Edinborough and Dublin Philosophical
Magazine, Vol. 17, pp. 319-320. https://zenodo.org/record/1430650#.Yoo9kPTP1EY
4.
T. Allmendinger, 2006: The thermal behaviour of gases under the influence of infrared-radiation, Int J Phys
Sci 11: 183-205.
https://academicjournals.org/journal/IJPS/article-full-text-pdf/E00ABBF60017
5.
N. S. Nahle, 2011: Repeatability of Professor Robert W. Wood’s 1909 experiment on the Theory of the
Greenhouse, Biology Cabinet Online-Academic Resources and Principia Scientific International, Monterrey,
N. L.
https://principia-scientific.org/publications/Experiment_on_Greenhouse_Effect.pdf
6.
V. R. Pratt, 2020: Wood's 1909 greenhouse experiment, performed more carefully,
http://clim.stanford.edu/WoodExpt/
7.
E. Loock, 2008: Der Treibhauseffekt - Messungen an einem Wood'schen Treibhaus,
https://docplayer.org/30841290-Der-treibhauseffekt-messungen-an-einem-wood-schen-treibhaus-von-
ehrenfried-loock-version.html
8
.
T.
O.
Seim,
B.
T.
Olsen,
2020:
The
Influence
of
IR
Absorption
and
Backscatter
Radiation
from
CO
2
on
Air
Temperature
during
Heating
in
a
Simulated
Earth/Atmosphere
Experiment
,
Atmospheric
and
Climate
Sciences, 10, pp. 168-185,
https://doi.org/10.4236/acs.2020.102009
.
9
.
H. v. Ditfurth, 1978:
Studio-Demonstration in German TV, ZDF TV-Series "Querschnitte".
10.
M. Schnell, 2020: Die falschen Klimaexperimente,
https://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/2020/11/06/die-falschen-klima-experimente/
11.
A. Gore, D. Guggenheim, 2006: An Inconvenient Truth, Movie, https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0497116/
12.
A. Watts, 2011: Replicating Al Gore's Climate 101 video experiment shows that his "high school physics"
could never work as advertised,
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/18/replicating-al-gores-climate-101-video-experiment-shows-that-his-
high-school-physics-could-never-work-as-advertised/?cn-reloaded=1
13.
J.-E. Solheim, 2016: Start des zweitägigen „Al Gore-Experiments", 10. Internationale Klima- und Energie-
Konferenz (10. IKEK), EIKE, Berlin, https://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/2017/02/04/10-ikek-prof-em-jan-erik-
solheim-start-des-zweitaegigen-al-gore-experiments/.
14.
H. Harde, M. Schnell, 2022: Verification of the Greenhouse Effect in the Laboratory, Science of Climate
Change, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1-33, https://doi.org/10.53234/scc202203/10.
15.
H. Harde, M. Schnell, 2022: Experimental Verification of the Greenhouse Effect
Download PDF in English
Nachweis des Treibhauseffekts im Labor
Download PDF in German
16.
H. Harde, 2013: Radiation and Heat Transfer in the Atmosphere: A Comprehensive Approach on a
Molecular Basis, International Journal of Atmospheric Sciences (Open Access), vol. 2013,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/503727
17.
Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) of the IPCC, 2021: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis,
Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmen-tal Panel on
Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V. et al. (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press.
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_TS.pdf
18.
H. Harde, 2017: Radiation Transfer Calculations and Assessment of Global Warming by CO
2
, International
Journal of Atmospheric Sciences, Volume 2017, Article ID 9251034, pp. 1-30,
https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijas/2017/9251034/, https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/9251034.
19.
R. Connolly, W. Soon, M. Connolly, S. Baliunas, J. Berglund, C. J. Butler, R. G. Cionco, A. G. Elias, V. M.
Fedorov, H. Harde, G. W. Henry, D. V. Hoyt, O. Humlum, D. R. Legates, S. Lün-ing, N. Scafetta, J.-E.
Solheim, L. Szarka, H. van Loon, V. M. V. Herrera, R. C. Willson, H. Yan and W. Zhang, 2021: How much
has the Sun influenced Northern Hemisphere temperature trends? An ongoing debate, Research in
Astronomy and Astrophysics 2021 Vol. 21 No. 6, 131(68pp),
http://www.raa-journal.org/raa/index.php/raa/article/view/4906
20.
H. Harde, 2022: How Much CO
2
and the Sun Contribute to Global Warming: Comparison of Simulated
Temperature Trends with Last Century Observations, Science of Climate Change, vol. 2, no 1, pp 105 -133,
https://doi.org/10.53234/scc202206/10.
LBL-RT-calculation for 20% CO
2
in air over 111 cm.
Experimental Set-Up
Set-Up of Allmendinger [4]