对于干绝热,您简单地忽略了温室气体。这可能听起来像一个作弊,但它不是。干绝热温度梯度不随温度改变或纬度。物理解释,如果你认为什么温室气体,它捕获的热量,提高了地球表面附近的温度,这扩展了对流层和提高了对流层顶。换句话说,对流层越来越高,所以递减率可以保持不变和对流层顶移动稍高一些。这也可以在较高和较低的纬度在对流层顶是地球上大约5英里靠近地球两极比赤道。绝热递减率是理想气体定律的属性。热量捕获温室气体不会影响,因为相应的气体膨胀与困热。真正的环境温度梯度是一个更复杂的波动与湿度。随着地球变暖,绝对湿度应该增加但相对湿度应略有减少。 A lower relative humidity, on average, should raise the lapse rate slightly (I think), as the dry adiabatic rate is greater than the moist rate. But this last paragraph take with a grain of salt. The environmental lapse rate is more complicated. - - - > 2 identical planets, with 2 identically thick atmospheres, same c, > same g, same lapse rate but one is a pure CO2 atmosphere and the other > is a non greenhouse gas with the same c (fictional gas, we will call > it CO2U) I'm not an expert in lapse rate, so my answer is a little bit of a cheat, but I'll take the thought experiment as best I can. Fictional gas - same density as CO2 (at standard temperature & Pressure "STP"). Both atmospheres are on planets of identical surface area, with identical gravity and both atmospheres have identical mass and (just to clarify) Identical density at STP. The atmosphere that traps heat will expand, so it will have a higher troposphere. Hot gas expands. Cold gas contracts. So the planet without the greenhouse gas will have a troposphere that's 6 miles high, the one with the greenhouse gas and a higher surface temperature will have a troposphere 10 miles high. The rate of temperature drop can remain consistent at (-g/c) but the hotter planet will have a higher troposphere and a more expanded atmosphere. That's for the theoretical model anyway. I don't do real world models. Those are much harder. > So the planet with the GHE atmosphere will be hotter at the surface, > hotter at any given height in the atmosphere and hotter as a complete > body/system (atmosphere+solid planet). Everything is hotter. Errr... > what happened to the supposed radiative S-B balance as viewed from > space then ?? Radiative input from sun the same, radiative output from > the GHE planet now higher The energy balance question is a fun one, especially when climate change "skeptics" use it to say "climate change can't possibly be right" - look at the chart they use, more heat leaves the Earth's surface than comes from the sun. [![https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/EnergyBalance/images/global_energy_budget_components.png][1]][1] [Source][2]. Lets ignore that debate for brevity and look at the overall theory of increasing greenhouse gas driven climate change. The Energy from the sun is same, so, why does Earth get warmer? The answer is trapped heat. So, what does this look like from space? Counter intuitively, from space the Earth looks colder than it did 30/40/50 years ago. It's giving less thermal radiation into space. This is because heat is being trapped in the lower atmosphere and oceans. The upper atmosphere on Earth is actually cooling and contracting and less thermal radiation is leaving the Earth, not more, even with the warming surface temperature. Measuring the decrease in heat that leaves the Earth is one way to measure the total amount of heat being trapped by climate change. In time, a new equilibrium will eventually be reached and heat in will equal heat out again but for now on Earth, Heat in is greater than heat out. The difference is heat added, which does things like warm the air, the oceans and melts the ice. In your scenario, there's no change, it's already warmer, but it's warmer in equilibrium, so heat in = heat out. In other words: A warmer atmosphere at equal heights doesn't mean more heat leaves the planet, because the CO2 rich atmosphere makes it harder for the thermal radiation from the warm surface to reach space. The greater heat is balanced out by a greater percentage being reflected back to the surface. The amount that goes into space is equal on the 2 planets. [1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/KHETu.png [2]: https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/EnergyBalance/page6.php