The atmosphere of Venus is 97% carbon dioxide (CO2). Mercury has no atmosphere at all. The average surface temperature of Mercury is 440° K, with a maximum of 725° K during the day. Mercury gets 9126.6 W per square meter of energy from the Sun. http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/mercuryfact.html
The average surface temperature of Venus is 737° K, with no diurnal variation. So it's hotter than Mercury. Venus gets only 2613.9 Watts per square meter of energy from the Sun. http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/venusfact.html
So, if CO2 is not a greenhouse gas, why is Venus hotter than Mercury, when it gets less than 1/3 the solar energy that Mercury does?
Ottawa Mike2009-06-21T16:20:55Z
Favorite Answer
Yes, CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Also, Venus's atmosphere is a lot thicker than ours (i.e. higher pressure). The earth has 0.03% CO2 and Venus has 97%. The two main gasses on earth are oxygen and nitrogen which are not greenhouse gasses. Wator vapour on earth is actually most abundant greenhouse gas by far.
So yes, Venus has a mega greenhouse effect and that's why it's so hot.
I have been busy for a while but having participated in the experiments this discussion is based on I am totally surprised at the rank ignorance about co2 and how it performs as a gas, solid and liquid. First co2 is a gas above 0 centigrade unless you can get it to over 150 psi where it can become a liquid. This liquid/gas phase change under pressure is what makes it a great refrigerant and why the financial backer of the AGW movement is willing to spend so much money to suppress its use.
Oh and for the information of all co2 absorbs humidity in the air if it is present just as easy as water absorbs co2. It is very easy to tell that most if not all of those claiming to be science or engineering persons because of their complete lack of basic knowledge on the subject. As far as I can see the only science many of the warmers have ever had is watching AIT a half dozen or so times until they had it memorized.
Why were James and Charles so certain up front that there was a problem with the science in AGW, they both have done refrigeration work, James in automotive and Charles in industrial refrigeration. And yes Chris humidity is a major problem when working with any and all refrigerants because for any gas to work it has to be able to be humidified. But to keep refrigeration systems work they have to be completely dehumidified. This is why the gas as delivered is guaranteed by the maker to be free from humidity. This is why the systems all contain a receiver/dryer equipped with a desiccant to absorb and humidity that get into the system..
Just how many refrigeration mechanics do you want us to turn loose on this forum to tell the truth about co2 and how it works in the real world. From discussions I have had alone I could get a couple of hundred and James and Charles know a lot more than I do for sure. If any of you want an education about co2 that is factual and testable we are willing because fantasy should never be taught as science and that is what all of you are doing.
I believe that Mars is a better example of a greenhouse gas moderating a planets temperature. Mars' atmosphere is 95% CO2 with a diurnal temperature range from -89 to -31 C. It does this with a solar irradiance of only 589.2 W/m2. It's atmosphere is dry and has no appreciable cloud influence. Without the greenhouse effect from CO2, the night time temperature would be close to the dark side of Mercury -184.4 C.. The atmosphere should loose enough heat at night that CO2 ought be precipitating out of the atmosphere each Martian night, but it doesn't get that cold.
Co2 is a greenhouse gas there is no doubt about that at all
Ben O As following space research is a hobby, I didn't really have to look this up but I certainly remember talk of greenhouse effect related to Venus a long time before 2005 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WGF-4731BRD-67&_user=706043&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000039460&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=706043&md5=f4a0bc3415da3e49bf2c28f955aa47bc Please note the date of this paper and the title, 1988 pre dates the IPCCs first assessment report by 2 years, Al Gore being VP by 5 years. Actually with a submission date of March 1987 the paper pre dates the IPCC itself.