off to bluer skies Profile picture
Aug 20, 2023 17 tweets 5 min read Read on X
One of the most challenging consequences of climate change is the fact that we expect both more drought AND more flooding.

The basic reason for it is the same reason your glasses fog up and your house is dry in winter.

Strap in for a short thread.

1/11 Image
The physical reason is something called the Clausius–Clapeyron relation (affectionally called C-C).

A complicated name (that I always misspell) for a very very simple concept:

*WARMER AIR CAN HOLD MORE WATER*

2/11
Imagine a bucket of air (or "parcel" in science speak). In this bucket of air, there is a certain amount of water vapor.

Turns out there is a maximum amount of water vapor this parcel can hold. Anything more turns from water vapor into liquid water (i.e. clouds and rain).

3/11 Image
Claussius-Clapeyron says that the max amount of water vapor air can hold increases exponentially with temperature (at a rate of ~7% / degree Celsius)!

4/11 Image
The opposite also holds: Colder air holds less water.

If you start out with a lot of water in the air bucket and cool it, eventually the max becomes less than the actual.

The excess water vapor (a gas) will fall out as liquid water (rain) or solid water (ice & snow).

5/11 Image
This is what happens when you bring in cold glasses into a hot, humid room. The glasses cool the air around them until all of a sudden that air finds itself holding too much water vapor, which condenses into liquid.

6/11
It's also why your house is dry in winter.

The air outside is cold in winter (at least, in the midwest).

Even if it is maxed out on water vapor, the maximum limit is very low (by Clausius-Clapeyron).

7/11 Image
When you bring the air inside, the actual amount of water doesn't change. What changes is how much water that air can hold.

All of a sudden it finds itself hot & very thirsty: it quickly sucks up all the moisture in the house (hence the dry skin)

8/11 Image
The same thing happens with climate change. As the air warms, the maximum amount of water vapor it can hold all of a sudden increases, and the atmosphere finds itself much thirstier.

That thirstier atmosphere sucks water out of the soil very quickly.

9/11 Image
At the same time, when conditions are right, and extra water vapor is pumped into a region - say, by a passing hurricane - it the air can hold more water vapor before it decides to dump it all as rain.

When it does rain, it pours! 10/11 Image
That's the gist of it, at least in terms of the atmosphere.

It gets worse of course, as drier soils would be more prone to flooding even if the storms wouldn't get worse, but that's a thread for a hydrologist to write.

11/11 (end main thread. bonus below)
An interesting question that doesn't really affect the argument is what happens to the average "actual water vapor in the air"? Does it stay the same?

We think not.

bonus: 12/16
Over the oceans at least, what stays the same is relative humidity, i.e. the ratio of actual water to max possible water and, thus, the ratio of vapor "decificit" to max possible water vapor.

13/16
But even if the fractional deficit stays the same, the actual deficit is larger, since it's the same fraction of an exponentially larger limit.

14/16
Over land, however, the average amount of water does increase but not as much as over the oceans, and relative humidity decreases over land (for complicated reasons. Go ask @DrMichaelByrne).

15/16
@DrMichaelByrne And, if you're still here with me, here is a graph of how fast the max possible water vapor increases.

It's easier to read the blue line, which is in grams of water vapor per kg of air. Hartmann textbook, fig. 1.9.

16/16 Image
@DrMichaelByrne P.S. can anyone tell I'm preparing slides for my climate change 101 class?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with off to bluer skies

off to bluer skies Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @byeXbyeX

Feb 27
Of course your answer is “High Resolution”. You just got finished readin' some modelling center director-- Stevens or Palmer probably. You're gonna be convinced of that 'til next month when you get to Schneider, and then you're gonna be here talkin' hybrid AI/numerical models

1/ Image
That's gonna last until next year -- you're gonna be in here regurgitating Emanuel and Randall or Jakob et al, talkin' about, you know, the weather-climate schism and the need to operationalize climate modelling.

2/
See the sad thing about a guy like you is in 50 years you're gonna start running some climate models' on your own and you're gonna come up with the fact that there are two certainties in life. One: don't do that. And two: climate modelling is hard.

3/
Read 4 tweets
Oct 12, 2023
I'm reading faculty applications. And since I'm an academic, I love giving free/gratuitous advice:

Write with your audience in mind! Who are they? What are their expertises? What do they know and, most importantly, what do they NEED to know?

1/
That is also general advice, but here is what I mean here specifically:

I read a lot of applications that go "I work on problem X, I use tools Y, and I found result Z"

Committee members are not universal experts and (most) are aware of that. So help us out!

2/
Why is problem X important? Why does your field care about X? Why should other people care about X? Why has the field not made progress so far on X?

Why is tool Y a good tool for the problem? / Why is Yinnovative ? / Why is it better/different than what came before?

3/
Read 8 tweets
Aug 7, 2023
There's currently an intense debate about the role of aerosol emissions in driving global warming. So how do we know how much aerosols matter? The answer might surprise you.

Strap in for a short thread featuring a Bavarian castle (and a plug for my own work)
1/18
Aerosols cool the climate in two ways: First off, aerosols are just reflective dust particles, so they reflect incoming solar radiation. We have a decent grasp on the magnitude of this "direct" effect.
2/18
Aerosols, however, also affect clouds. When water vapor condenses from gas into liquid cloud droplets, it prefers to do so around a solid or liquid particle (i.e. an aerosol!). In fact, it is hard for water to condense at all in a pristine atmosphere with no aerosols!
3/18
Read 18 tweets
Apr 17, 2023
@PatrickTBrown31 @RSarava @CColose @theresphysics @MatthewWielicki @curryja @raspstephan Yeah, the IPCC is getting fooled by order statistics here. If you have an ensemble of noisy realizations and you pick the 5th percentile across the ensemble, then yes, you'll get places that might show a decrease in extreme precip (esp for low signal-to-noise ratio).

1/
@PatrickTBrown31 @RSarava @CColose @theresphysics @MatthewWielicki @curryja @raspstephan But it's like saying "We have looked at an ensemble of 100 people that started smoking and 5 of them have gotten faster runs in their 100m dash since smoking. Therefore, there is no consensus that smoking decreases athletic ability"

2/
@PatrickTBrown31 @RSarava @CColose @theresphysics @MatthewWielicki @curryja @raspstephan Here is a simple representation:
Y0 ~ U[-0.5 0.5]
Y1 ~ U[0,1]
Draw 100 realizations

Y increases almost everywhere, in *each* member, yet decreases everywhere in the 5th percentile of the difference.

Is this evidence of lack of consensus amongst members? Image
Read 5 tweets
Nov 1, 2021
A thread earlier made me realize there has been a shift into which climate deniers & skeptics (and what bad takes) are getting love from both the mass- and social-media.

This leads me to think that second age of climate denialism has ended. A new age has begun.

1/
The first age is always the purest, the most primal. For climate science that was the age of denying the earth is warming due to human emissions. The age of "It's not warming".

Its protagonists were the likes of Dick Lindzen, Fred Singer and Anthony Watts.

2/
The second age was the age of the Lukewarmers. "Ok, It's warming, but climate sensitivity is very low."

This is the age of "Models overestimate Mid-troposphere warming" and "Climate Sensitivity is 1.5 C"

Enter Spencer, Christy, Lewis, Curry.

3/
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(