No I like it. Thought provoking once again.
I would say Mars albedo effect of 30% since it's all desert rock, The fact that the atmosphere is nearly all CO2 and virtually nothing else. Close to a vacuum if you see and believe Total Recall. And CO2 as pointed out to me doesn't reabsorb it's own infrared radiation. So There is no H2O to help out of which is 95% of the earths GHG's. Therefore there is less absorption and re-radiation. And there the fact the planet is a lot cooler, so has anyone measured the spectrum of infrared light that leaves Mars? And since Co2 is logarithmic, it would be near the saturation limit since there is far less infrared light leaving Mars altogether.
One last point, Mars has a smaller circumference so there is more chance of the infrared leaving the planet after CO2 infrared emission. Since there is little chance of re absorption in the atmosphere. There would be a GHG effect on Mars, just not as anywhere near as noticable.
__________________
"Natural climate forces can not be underestimated, but no climate model produced can show the speed of the melting in the Arctic that has occurred without adding human contributed emissions." A Physicist from the U.S Army.
http://www.theage.com.au/frontpage/2.../frontpage.pdf
|