Itoero

effects of Global Warming

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Itoero said:

Is it possible to create a molecule that binds with CO2 and blocks its greenhouse effect?

Plants do that, with oxygen as a byproduct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Carrock said:

Plants do that, with oxygen as a byproduct.

Yes but can't we form chemicals to 'vaporize' in the atmosphere and block the greenhouse effect of CO2 by reacting with those chemicals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Itoero said:

Yes but can't we form chemicals to 'vaporize' in the atmosphere and block the greenhouse effect of CO2 by reacting with those chemicals?

Nothing I'm aware of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Carrock said:

Nothing I'm aware of.

What structural property enables the absorption/emission of radiant energy in certain molecules (greenhouse  gas) and disables it in other molecules?

Edited by Itoero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Itoero said:

What structural property enables the absorption/emission of radiant energy in certain molecules (greenhouse  gas) and disables it in other molecules?

 

Quote

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is also an important greenhouse gas. It has a long lifetime in Earth's atmosphere. Carbon dioxide strongly absorbs energy with a wavelength of 15 μm (micrometers). This makes carbon dioxide a good absorber of wavelengths falling in the infrared radiation region of the spectrum.

http://www.ces.fau.edu/nasa/module-2/how-greenhouse-effect-works.php

Like water and microwaves, but here we have CO2 and IR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Itoero said:

What structural property enables the absorption/emission of radiant energy ....

Tri-atomic molecules can stretch and bend, or waggle, in such a way (asymmetrically) as to "resonate" with infrared wavelengths.  Di-atomic molecules can't move in such a way, always constrained to move symmetrically.

Search: co2 vibrational modes animation.  I know there are you tubes of Prof. Denning, doing his 'waggle dance' showing how CO2 absorbs heat, using his head as the carbon and his upraised fists as the oxygen.

Or just search 'infrared CO2 waggle' online.

IRabsorption1.PNG.8d1abbcc8d0b130f2eef00b1db96e3b4.PNG  

The symmetric stretch is not infrared active, and so this vibration is not observed in the infrared spectrum of CO2.”

~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Essay said:

Tri-atomic molecules can stretch and bend, or waggle, in such a way (asymmetrically) as to "resonate" with infrared wavelengths.  Di-atomic molecules can't move in such a way, always constrained to move symmetrically.

Search: co2 vibrational modes animation.  I know there are you tubes of Prof. Denning, doing his 'waggle dance' showing how CO2 absorbs heat, using his head as the carbon and his upraised fists as the oxygen.

Or just search 'infrared CO2 waggle' online.

IRabsorption1.PNG.8d1abbcc8d0b130f2eef00b1db96e3b4.PNG  

The symmetric stretch is not infrared active, and so this vibration is not observed in the infrared spectrum of CO2.”

~

I've read CO absorbs infrared 3 times 'better' then CO2, how is that possible? Does the binding between C en O enable more radiant energy absorption because there is more 'vibrational space'? CH4 is also more potent then Co2...why?

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor CO

Is it correct to say that basically, vibrational nuclei are necessary  for absorption/emission infrared?

Edited by Itoero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Itoero said:

I've read CO absorbs infrared 3 times 'better' then CO2, how is that possible? 

Where did you read that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Itoero said:

I've read CO absorbs infrared 3 times 'better' then CO2, how is that possible? Does the binding between C en O enable more radiant energy absorption because there is more 'vibrational space'? CH4 is also more potent then Co2...why?

....

Is it correct to say that basically, vibrational nuclei are necessary  for absorption/emission infrared?

Absorption of energy is probably more easily thought of as occurring within the molecular bonds, rather than within “vibrational nuclei” as you suggest.  Methane, with four bonds, has many more opportunities to vibrate (waggle) in ways that absorbs IR, so that might be why it is stronger.  But whatever the reason, when the nuclei are different, then the bonds are different too.

For example, when the 4 hydrogen atoms of methane are substituted with chlorine or fluorine, you get an even stronger absorber for IR.  Methane (CH4), is about 100 times as powerful as carbon dioxide (~100 x CO2), but tetraflouro-methane (CF4) (~5000 x CO2) and dichloro-difluoro-methane (CCl2F2) (~11000 x CO2) both absorb more strongly than methane, even though the structure of all three molecules is about the same.  The one with twice the asymmetry (mixed Cl/F) as the other is about twice as strong too, but maybe that is just coincidence.

I’d never heard of CO being a greenhouse absorber, but I found it listed online as a "very weak" absorber!  Perhaps the unbound electrons at each end of the molecule can vibrate in a manner similar to (but much weaker than) how hydrogen bonds would vibrate, but that should probably be its own topic since CO doesn’t seem to be considered a significant ‘greenhouse’ gas.

“Carbon monoxide (CO) is only a very weak direct greenhouse gas, but has important indirect effects on global warming. Carbon monoxide reacts with hydroxyl (OH) radicals in the atmosphere, reducing their abundance.”

~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, swansont said:

Where did you read that?

On Wikipedia but I can't rediscover it.

I just read this on quora: "Carbon monoxide (CO) is not considered a direct greenhouse gas, mostly because it does not absorb terrestrial thermal IR energy strongly enough. However, CO is able to modulate the production of methane and tropospheric ozone."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now