{"id":338762,"date":"2024-08-08T09:15:03","date_gmt":"2024-08-08T07:15:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=338762"},"modified":"2024-08-08T09:15:06","modified_gmt":"2024-08-08T07:15:06","slug":"vpd-vapor-pressure-deficit-a-correlation-to-global-cloud-fraction","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=338762","title":{"rendered":"VPD, Vapor Pressure Deficit a Correlation to Global Cloud Fraction?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Charles Blaisdell, PhD ChE                                                            <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The term \u201cVapor Pressure Deficit\u201d, VPD is not a new term it has been used in agricultural management for many years with correlations to plant growth and CO2 absorption.  VPD is the difference between the atmospheric saturated water partial pressure, Psw, and the actual water vapor pressure, Pw.  It is common knowledge that as VPD approaches zero at any temperature that clouds are likely to form.  This paper will explore the relationship between global VPD and global Cloud Fraction (Cover), CC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a previous paper, Blaisdell (2023) (4)<\/a>, \u201cTemperature \u2013 Dew Point Temperature\u201d, T-Td, was explored as a global correlation to CC.  This paper will show that VPD is a better correlation than T-Td.  From 1975 to 2022, VPD tracks the increase in climate change.  It is common sense that if cloud cover decreases that the earth temperature will increase (assuming all other variables remain constant).  VPD correlation to CC is not a perfect correlation but is a hint it may be on the right track of exploring VPD\u2019s role in climate change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

VPD may correlate to cloud cover reflectivity (albedo) in the Dubal et al (2022) CERS data analysis.  Dubal et al (2022) (6)<\/a> showed that the reflectivity of cloudy areas where 2x the reflectivity (short wave radiation out) of clear sky areas, resulting in albedo reduction of the earths cloudy areas  being 85% of the total earth\u2019s albedo for the 19 years of data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A correlation of VPD to cloud cover is a key variable in the \u201cCloud Reduction Global Warming\u201d, CRGW, theory presented in Blaisdell (2023) (4)<\/a>, CRGW theory starts with localized land-based reduction in Evapotranspiration, ET, (reduction in Specific Humidity, SH).  A land-based reduction in SH is mathematically related (through Clause- Chaperon equations) to a VPD increase.  The VPD increase is correlated to Cloud Cover decrease: The subject of this paper.  The cloud cover decrease lets in more sun which increases temperature and evaporates more water, global SH increases.    The result of this natural process can be seen in the current atmospheric \u201cfingerprint\u201d over time:  Increasing temperature, increasing specific humidity, decreasing relative humidity, decreasing cloud fraction, and increasing VPD.  Initial results indicate cloud reduction could account for a significant part of the current global warming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CO2 is innocent but clouds are guilty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Scientist have long known that cloud cover, CC, (fraction) of the earth is a key part of seasonal and yearly climate change (11)<\/a>.  The pursuit of a cloud model has been going on for years.  The earliest models had poor correlation of CC to relative Humidity (11)<\/a>.   NASA is working on a computer model, CHIMP6, to predict cloud cover with some success (9)<\/a>.  Current International Pannel on Climate Change, IPCC, models assume cloud cover (fraction) is yearly constant (no data to say otherwise per IPCC).  NASA satellite data reported in \u201cClimate and Clouds\u201d (12)<\/a> suggest cloud cover may have decreased since 1982.  There is currently no agreement on how much CC has changed or if CC has changed, therefore IPCC climate change models contain no CC change.  There is agreement in the scientific community that if CC has changed it should be included in any climate model (11)<\/a>.  \u201cClimate and Clouds\u201d (12)<\/a> (also in (5)<\/a>) CC data is all this paper must go on.  The \u201cClimate and Clouds\u201d (12)<\/a> data shows that CC can range from 57% to 68 % depending on the hemisphere.  The global seasonal range is 59.6% to 65% (range = 5.4%).  Modeling (4)<\/a> calculates a -3.4% change in the average CC could make a +0.85 \u2070C change in global climate.  The monthly variability makes small annual averages difficult to see, averages over several years are needed to see any change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The repetitive seasonal variation of cloud cover (fraction), CC, is show in Figure 1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Figure 1.\u00a0 CC vs time, data from Climate Explorer\u00a0(5)<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Southern Hemisphere seams to rule the global cloud fraction, CC, (assumed, due to the Earth\u2019s tilt (less sun, cooler) and less land surface (more ocean for water evaporation along with hemispherical interactions).   In search of atmospheric variables that correlated to CC the previous paper, (4)<\/a>, presented the relationship between \u201cTemperature \u2013 dew point Temperature\u201d, T-Td, and CC to use in the CRGW model for climate change.  This paper will introduce the \u201cVapor Pressure Deficit\u201d, VPD, correlation to CC.  VPD is defined as the saturated vapor pressure of water, Pws, \u2013 vapor pressure of water, Pw).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pws = 6.116441*10^(T*7.591386\/(240.7263+T))     Eq 1
(Note: the above is not an Arrhenius equation but give similar results.)
Pw = SH*1000\/(621.9907+SH)                                 Eq 2
VPD = Pws \u2013 Pw                                                       Eq 3
Since:  RH = Pw\/Pws                                                Eq 4
VPD = Pws * (1-RH)                                                  Eq 5                               <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Where:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pws = the saturated water pressure in hPa.
Pw = the actual water pressure in hPa
T = temperature in \u2018C
SH = specific humidity in g\/kg(da)
RH = relative humidity, %
Eq 1 and 2 are from from Vaisala Oyj (2013) (14)<\/a>:         <\/p>\n\n\n\n

VPD is used in ET papers on agricultural water management and plant growth models.  An excellent summary of VPD in agriculture can be found in Novick et al (2024) (13)<\/a>.  In this paper we will look at VPD as a deficit that retards cloud formation.  VPD and T-Td both increases over time, Figure 2.  Cloud Fraction decrease over time, Figure 3.  VPD and T-Td both use the same input of Temperature and Specific Humidity, SH, in different equations. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The result is VPD is more sensitivity to Temperature and SH.   Cloud Fraction, CC, vs time has a lower R^2 than VPD because CC is binary, only covers clouds or no clouds.  The \u201ccloudy areas\u201d could have variability in radiation reflectivity that is not included in the CC number that affect VPD (such as lower amount to \u201cpartly cloudiness\u201d or cloud density).  Using Dubal (2022) (6)<\/a> data, Blaisdell (2023) (3)<\/a> showed the cloud reflectivity variability in the years 2000 to 2019, decreased while the CC was relatively constant (to be discussed later). <\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n
\n
\"\"
Data for both graphs from Climate Explorer data\u00a0(5)<\/a>\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Land vs Marine VPD<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Figure 2\u2019s VPD data can be divided into Land and Marine (Meto Office Dashboard (10)<\/a>), showing the land VPD vs time has a significant increasing slope (cloud reduction).  The marine slope is slightly increasing (low R^2), See Figure 4.  The differences in slopes suggest the source of the global VPD increase is from the land \u2013 consistent with CRGW theory.  Mero Office (10)<\/a> commentary suggest CO2 is the reason for the slope difference?<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
Figure 4.\u00a0 VPD Land and Marine vs time from Meto Office Dashboard\u00a0(10)<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

VPD vs CC<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Correlating VPD or T-Td to CC is shown in Figure 5.   VPD, (Pws-Pw), is a better correlation to cloud cover.  Note the Mt Pinatubo years 1992 to 1998 were removed (Mt Pinatubo ash increased cloud cover in those years).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Figure 5  VPD and T-Td vs CC  basic data from Climate Explorer (10)<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Interesting Side Bar<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Figure 2 uses yearly data because monthly VPD data contains a repetitive strange variability.   VPD plotted monthly in Figure 6 showing a strong monthly hysteresis to VPD.   (T-Td) has the same hysteresis pattern but less pronounced, not shown). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Figure 6\u00a0 Monthly VPD vs CC for year ranges 1982-6 and 2015-8, note shift in pattern<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

This author is not a climatologist thus can only guess that the strange pattern in Figure 6 is due to hemispherical interactions and\/or the wetter climate ET going from spring to summer vs dryer ET fall to winter.  For global climate change, this strange pattern is not of interest but the shifting with time is.   Figure 2 plots this shift with time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

VPD and the Dubal et al (2024) CERES data (or Loeb et al (2021)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Dubal et al (2024) (6)<\/a> and Loeb et al (2021) (7)<\/a> 19-year study of CERES data are currently the most accurate measure of the earth\u2019s albedo, decreasing from 0.293 to 0.288 over the 19 years, see Figure 7<\/ins>.  The global temperature increased 0.36\u2019C over the 19 years.  The cloud cover from Climate Explorer for those years was essentially flat, see Figure xx8<\/del>, suggesting that cloud cover was not a factor in climate change for those years.  Dubal et al (2022) separated the reflectivity (SW radiation out) in to \u201cclear sky\u201d  and \u201ccloudy areas\u201d to show that the cloudy areas was 2x more reflective (albedo) <\/ins>than the clear sky, see Figure 9<\/ins>.  Considering the cloud cover (67% in Dubal) of the earth the cloudy areas account for 85% to the total earth\u2019s albedo change for those 19 years.  The earth\u2019s VPD was increasing (Figure 8) <\/ins>for those years suggesting that clouds were thinning or there were more partly cloudy skies in the cloud cover number.  VPD vs earth\u2019s albedo is not that good (not enough years) but in the right direction, see Figure 10.<\/ins><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n
\n
\"\"
Climate changes is more complicated than just the albedo.\u00a0 The long wave radiation, LW, out is part of the overall equation:
Climate Change = SW out \u2013 LW out = Earth\u2019s Energy (Radiation) Imbalance, EEI.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Cloud cover can affect the LW out by reflecting (down) (or absorbing) LW back to the earth: less clouds = more LW out = cooler.  This cloud cover affect is overwhelmed by the main effect of reduced clouds:  less cloud cover = increased SW in (to surface) = increased LW out = increased EEI = warmer (see Blaisdell (2023) (2)<\/a> figure 1 and 2).  VPD is only correlated with the SW reflectivity, albedo, Figure 10.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Discussion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why study a variable the predicts cloud cover?  NASA\u2019s data on cloud cover only goes back to 1983 and is very noisy.  CERES data is only 19 years. When did cloud cover start to change?  VPD may give some clues.  Specific Humidity data for the VPD calculation only goes back to 1948 and is increasing to 2022 (not shown) suggesting that cloud cover has been decreasing since 1948.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 VPD is an improvement over T-Td vs cloud cover, but not without a high degree of variability.  Correlations with Dubal data showed that cloud cover number is not always correlated to VPD or earth\u2019s albedo.   Suggesting that VPD at times is increasing while CC is not decreasing, but the reflectivity of the cloud cover is decreasing, possibly explaining the high variability of CC vs time.   VPD vs earth\u2019s albedo would be a better metric if more than 19 years was available.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How much has cloud cover or thinning reduced (VPD suggest about 3% reduction in CC since 1975) and what causes global VPD to change?  The CRGW theory gives one possibility:  Land changes that reduce the water vapor into the atmosphere.  It has been almost 5 years since the last NASA report on clouds \u2013 time for another.  The IPCC is theorizing CO2 and other greenhouse gases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CO2 is innocent but clouds are guilty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bibliography<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. \u201cWhere have all the Clouds gone and why care? \u201c\u00a0 by Charles Blaisdell (2022) web link:\u00a0\u00a0<\/a>Where have all the Clouds gone and why care? \u2013 Watts Up With That?<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. \u201cCO2 is Innocent but Clouds are Guilty.\u00a0 New Science has Created a \u201cBlack Swan Event\u201d**\u201d\u00a0 by Charles Blaisdell (2022) web link\u00a0<\/a>CO2 is Innocent but Clouds are Guilty.\u00a0 New Science has Created a \u201cBlack Swan Event\u201d** \u2013 Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. \u201cMore on Cloud Reduction.\u00a0 CO2 is innocent but Clouds are guilty\u201d by\u00a0 Charles Blaisdell web link\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a>More on Cloud Reduction.\u00a0 CO2 is innocent but Clouds are guilty (2023). \u2013 Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  4. \u201cAn Unexplored Source of Climate Change: Land Evapotranspiration Changes Over Time.\u201d (2023) \u00a0By Charles Blaisdell web link\u00a0\u00a0<\/a>An Unexplored Source of Climate Change: Land Evapotranspiration Changes Over Time. \u2013 Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  5. Climate Explorer web site\u00a0\u00a0<\/u><\/a>Climate Explorer: Select a monthly field (knmi.nl)<\/a>\u00a0 go to \u201cCloud Cover\u201d or any other data set, for CC\u00a0 click \u201cEUMETSAT CM-SAF 0.25\u00b0 cloud fraction\u201d\u00a0 click \u201cselect field\u201d at top of page on next page enter latitude (-90 to 90) and longitude (-180 to 180) for whole earth. Raw data link is above the graph.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  6. \u201cRadiative Energy Flux Variation from 2001\u20132020\u201d (2021) by Hans-Rolf D\u00fcbal and Fritz Vahrenholt\u00a0 web link:\u00a0\u00a0<\/a>Atmosphere | Free Full-Text | Radiative Energy Flux Variation from 2001\u20132020 | HTML (mdpi.com)<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  7. \u201cSatellite and Ocean Data Reveal Marked Increase in Earth\u2019s Heating Rate\u201d (2021) by Norman G. Loeb,Gregory C. Johnson,Tyler J. Thorsen,John M. Lyman,Fred G. Rose,Seiji Kato\u00a0 web link\u00a0\u00a0<\/a>Satellite and Ocean Data Reveal Marked Increase in Earth\u2019s Heating Rate \u2013 Loeb \u2013 2021 \u2013 Geophysical Research Letters \u2013 Wiley Online Library<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  8. Thermodynamics of climate change between cloud cover, atmospheric temperature and humidity (2021) by V\u00edctor Mendoza, Marni Pazos, Ren\u00e9 Gardu\u00f1o & Blanca Mendoza\u00a0 web link\u00a0\u00a0<\/a>Thermodynamics of climate change between cloud cover, atmospheric temperature and humidity | Scientific Reports (nature.com)<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  9. Ensemble of CMIP6 derived reference and potential evapotranspiration with radiative and advective components\u00a0 by Nels Bjarke (2023), Joseph Barsugli & Ben Livneh\u00a0 link\u00a0\u00a0<\/a>Ensemble of CMIP6 derived reference and potential evapotranspiration with radiative and advective components | Scientific Data (nature.com)<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  10. Met Office Climate Dashboard\u00a0 web Link\u00a0<\/a>Humidity | Climate Dashboard (metoffice.cloud)<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  11. \u201cClouds and relative humidity in climate models; or what really regulates cloud cover?\u201d\u00a0 by Walcek, C. (1996) \u00a0web link\u00a0<\/a>Clouds and relative humidity in climate models; or what really regulates cloud cover? (Technical Report) | OSTI.GOV<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  12. \u201cClimate and clouds\u201d by web site\u00a0 link\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/a>climate4you ClimateAndClouds<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  13. \u201cThe impacts of rising vapour pressure deficit in natural and managed ecosystems\u201d (2024) by Kimberly A. Novick, Darren L. Ficklin, Charlotte Grossiord, Alexandra G. Konings, Jordi Mart\u00ednez-Vilalta, Walid Sadok, Anna T. Trugman, A. Park Williams, Alexandra J. Wright, John T. Abatzoglou, Matthew P. Dannenberg, Pierre Gentine, Kaiyu Guan, Miriam R. Johnston, Lauren E. L. Lowman,\u00a0<\/a>David J. P. Moore, Nate G. McDowell\u00a0 web link\u00a0\u00a0The impacts of rising vapour pressure deficit in natural and managed ecosystems \u2013 Novick \u2013 Plant, Cell & Environment \u2013 Wiley Online Library<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  14. \u201cHUMIDITY CONVERSION FORMULAS\u201d by Vaisala Oyj (2013) web link\u00a0\u00a0<\/a>Humidity_Conversion_Formulas_B210973EN-F (hatchability.com)<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    The term \u201cVapor Pressure Deficit\u201d, VPD is not a new term it has been used in agricultural management for many years with correlations to plant growth and CO2 absorption. VPD is the difference between the atmospheric saturated water partial pressure, Psw, and the actual water vapor pressure, Pw. It is common knowledge that as VPD approaches zero at any temperature that clouds are likely to form. This paper will explore the relationship between global VPD and global Cloud Fraction (Cover), CC.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":338780,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691830031,691818432,691818087,691830030],"class_list":{"0":"post-338762","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-chimp6","9":"tag-clouds","10":"tag-global-warming","11":"tag-vapor-pressure-deficit","13":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0-clouds-over-the-ocean.jpeg?fit=3840%2C2400&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1q7U","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":408190,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=408190","url_meta":{"origin":338762,"position":0},"title":"Slicing the earth to study Cloud Fraction and VPD.","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/14\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"According to many sources, the earth\u2019s Cloud Fraction, CF, is the major source of climate change uncertainty. Cloud Fraction varies a lot from northern hemisphere to southern hemisphere and in-between. Global measurement of CF has a narrow range (64% to 60%). With accuracy challenging climate change models. This essay will\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Atmospheric physics\"","block_context":{"text":"Atmospheric physics","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=atmospheric-physics"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0Screenshot-2025-10-14-192805.png?fit=1200%2C598&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0Screenshot-2025-10-14-192805.png?fit=1200%2C598&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0Screenshot-2025-10-14-192805.png?fit=1200%2C598&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0Screenshot-2025-10-14-192805.png?fit=1200%2C598&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/0Screenshot-2025-10-14-192805.png?fit=1200%2C598&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":374008,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=374008","url_meta":{"origin":338762,"position":1},"title":"More Evidence on Vapor Pressure Deficit, Cloud Reduction, and Climate Change","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"04\/07\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"In addition to WUWT, more and more web sites are mentioning cloud reduction as a source of climate change but offer no source of the cloud reduction.\u00a0 WUWT was the first to published this author\u2019s theory: Cloud Reduction Global Warming, CRGW,\u00a0(1).\u00a0 A critical part of CRGW theory is the relationship\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)\"","block_context":{"text":"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=carbon-dioxide-co%e2%82%82"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0-clouds-33.jpeg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0-clouds-33.jpeg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0-clouds-33.jpeg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0-clouds-33.jpeg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0-clouds-33.jpeg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":362499,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=362499","url_meta":{"origin":338762,"position":2},"title":"Cloud Reduction Global Warming, CRGW 101.\u00a0 A Competitive Theory to CO2 Related Global Warming","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"01\/17\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Cloud Reduction Global Warming, CRGW, theory is a cascading natural process that only since about 1970 has become significant in Climate Change. The basic elements of CRGW theory have been around forever, it is the size (% of the earth affected) that has increased to the point that this\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)\"","block_context":{"text":"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=carbon-dioxide-co%e2%82%82"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0clouds-vienna-scaled-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C832&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0clouds-vienna-scaled-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C832&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0clouds-vienna-scaled-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C832&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0clouds-vienna-scaled-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C832&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0clouds-vienna-scaled-1.jpg?fit=1200%2C832&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":341189,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=341189","url_meta":{"origin":338762,"position":3},"title":"Soundings, Weather Balloons, and Vapor Pressure Deficit","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"08\/31\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Yes, it is about hot air, hot lower humidity air from any parcel of land that has lower annual evaporation of water with time (many years). Due to lack of cooling from evaporation this type of parcel has a higher temperature and lower specific humidity, SH, than in its virgin\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0-Weather-Balloons.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0-Weather-Balloons.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0-Weather-Balloons.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0-Weather-Balloons.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0-Weather-Balloons.png?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":438752,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=438752","url_meta":{"origin":338762,"position":4},"title":"Proposed Theory of Historical Global Cloud Cover.","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"04\/11\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"It expands on the earlier Cloud Reduction Global Warming (CRGW) theory, proposing that long-term changes in global annual evapotranspiration (ET(ga)) \u2014 driven by the stark difference in evaporation rates between oceans and land \u2014 can explain historical variations in global cloud fraction (CF(ga)) and thus Earth's temperature, independent of (or\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Atmospheric physics\"","block_context":{"text":"Atmospheric physics","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=atmospheric-physics"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-explanatory-image.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-explanatory-image.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-explanatory-image.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-explanatory-image.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":277596,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=277596","url_meta":{"origin":338762,"position":5},"title":"Wrong, LA Times, There is No Evidence \u2018Climate Change Boosts Risk of Explosive Wildfire Growth in California\u2019","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"09\/06\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"An article in\u00a0The Los Angeles Times\u00a0(LA Times)\u00a0published on September 4, 2023 makes the claim\u00a0that a study by a Berkeley think tank proves \u201cClimate change has ratcheted up the risk of explosive wildfire growth in California by 25%.\u201d This is false.","rel":"","context":"In \"California\"","block_context":{"text":"California","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=california"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/0TEDSIXR5IRCAVCYBE7F5PNINAI.webp?fit=1024%2C641&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/0TEDSIXR5IRCAVCYBE7F5PNINAI.webp?fit=1024%2C641&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/0TEDSIXR5IRCAVCYBE7F5PNINAI.webp?fit=1024%2C641&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/0TEDSIXR5IRCAVCYBE7F5PNINAI.webp?fit=1024%2C641&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/338762","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=338762"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/338762\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":338782,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/338762\/revisions\/338782"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/338780"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=338762"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=338762"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=338762"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}