Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics

Volumes 90–91, December 2012, Pages 9-14
  • National Institute of Geophysics, Geodesy and Geography, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 3 G. Bonchev, Sofia, Bulgaria

The strong sensitivity of the Earth’s radiation balance to variations in the lower stratospheric ozone—reported previously—is analysed here by the use of non-linear statistical methods. Our non-linear model of the land air temperature (T)—driven by the measured Arosa total ozone (TOZ)—explains 75% of total variability of Earth’s T variations during the period 1926–2011. We have analysed also the factors which could influence the TOZ variability and found that the strongest impact belongs to the multi-decadal variations of galactic cosmic rays. Constructing a statistical model of the ozone variability, we have been able to predict the tendency in the land air T evolution till the end of the current decade. Results show that Earth is facing a weak cooling of the surface T by 0.05–0.25 K (depending on the ozone model) until the end of the current solar cycle. A new mechanism for O3 influence on climate is proposed.



I disagree with the authors interpretation of the mechanism involved that is described in part as:  increase or decrease of the greenhouse effect, depending on the sign of the humidity changes. 

More simply, the Earths radiation balance is much affected by the degree to which incoming radiation is reflected by cloud cover.

I maintain (suggest is too weak a word) that ozone as an absorber of outgoing radiation by the Earth, radiation continuously, day and night,  impacting the temperature and relative humidity of the highly reflective ice-cloud-zone that is found from a couple of kilometres above the surface of the Earth unto the limits of the ‘weather-sphere’. The weather-sphere, I would describe as the zone that contains sufficient water vapour to promote the appearance and disappearance of  minute, highly reflective, multi-branching  (like the international space station) crystals of ice.

Ice crystals reflect and scatter incoming radiation,

There is no need to invoke carbon dioxide or its increasing presence in the atmosphere, or the notion of a greenhouse effect, to explain surface temperature variations. Insofar as carbon dioxide promotes the growth of vegetation and increases the mass of water in the hydro logic cycle it will promote humidity and the formation of more cloud.

The atmosphere ejects heat by virtue of convection. It lacks any of the properties of a greenhouse. The tragic failure of climate science, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, is to misunderstand the physics of the atmosphere.

The wilfulness of ignorance and the determination to hang on to old dogma is astounding: this paper appeared in 2012.


4 thoughts on “Confirmation

  1. Looks like this paper is worthy of closer examination, Erl. It is clear that GCR has been steadily increasing for some time now. Attributed to the Low SSN or quiet sun. Cycle due to end in next few years. So lots of intensity to be absorbed by oxygen, thus ozone pressure. Cheers Macha.


  2. I have done some more reading and the theory of upwelling heating does not stack up if what I read is true, in so far as……
    In the stratosphere, the height of the maximum ozone heating rate is much higher than the height of the maximum ozone concentration. From TOA to the height of the maximum ozone concentration, the downward solar flux decreases but the ozone concentration increases. This results in opposite effects on the ozone heating rate. At the height of the maximum ozone heating rate, these two opposite roles are balanced.
    This can be intuitively understood that the exceedingly strong ozone absorption causes the incoming solar flux to be largely attenuated before it reaches the location of the maximum ozone concentration, and such attenuation is enhanced when solar zenith angle becomes larger.

    A simple parameterization for the height of maximum ozone heating
    rate. Feng Zhang a,b,⇑, Can Hou a, Jiangnan Li c, Renqiang Liu a, Cuiping Liu a
    Infrared Physics & Technology 87 (2017) 104–112

    So the corrolary is if the mechanism was from upwelling IR, why do we not see max heating rates at heights lower than the max ozone concentration?


  3. Macca, the article considers only one source of heating for ozone, namely solar radiation. It makes no reference to heating of the atmosphere by ozone via the absorption of radiation from the Earth itself.

    Heating by ozone reduces the lapse rate to zero at the tropopause that can be at 500 hPa in elevation (half the atmospheric depth) in high latitudes of the winter hemisphere in the absence of any form of solar radiation at all.

    There is very little ozone in the troposphere but I have read that there is as much atmospheric heating by ozone in the troposphere as in the stratosphere.

    The amount of heating by ozone is a function of atmospheric density. The ozone molecule has to be able to offload the energy responsible for its vibration before it can accept the energy that causes it to vibrate.

    Re direct heating by solar radiation alone. The height of maximum ozone concentration is lower than the zone of maximum heating of ozone from solar radiation due to the attenuation of the particular bands of radiation that are absorbed by oxygen and ozone as atmospheric density increases. For the ozone molecule to persist it must be free of the radiation that destroys it. This alone explains why the zone of heating is higher than the zone of maximum ozone concentration.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s