I had the extreme privilege to travel to Charleston SC specifically to see the solar eclipse in totality on August 21st and it was amazing.
So I want to engage in a totally non refining discussion about what I saw and some questions I have because of that observation.
First, it was a cloudy day in Charleston on the day of the eclipse but had there not been clouds, I would have never noticed this. Around 2 on the day of the eclipse the clouds broke up enough for the sun to be peeking in and out among the clouds. Come the time of the actual eclipse, there was spotty cloud cover but thin enough to look at the sun with the glasses and see the moon eclipsing the sun. But looking around as the moon progressively blocked more and more sun, I noticed that until the sun was about 95% eclipsed, the darkness that fell was no more than a cloudy day before a big rain. When the sun was about 95% eclipsed it was noticeably darker and it went to full dark and 2 minutes later emerged on the other side of the moon and appeared to be just another cloudy day dark within about 10 minutes.
What I realized was that clouds often block the similar amount of daylight as a 95% eclipse. I always knew clouds block the sun but never realised how much they block it until I witnessed a full solar eclipse and could relate the darkness progression to the actual percentage of blockage by the moon in an eclipse.
So my question. One of the effects of climate change is the increase of atmospheric moisture in the air. Estimated at 7% more moisture per ºC increase in temperature. So if the atmosphere is holding more moisture, it is making more clouds. And since clouds are so effective at blocking sunlight from hitting the earth (as I learned from observing the eclipse). Why doesn't the increased cloud cover have a cooling effect on the planet?
Just to give you an idea of the cloud cover we had, I shot this photo as the sun emerged after the full eclipse. Because of the cloud cover this could be shot without a filter, hence the blue color.
So I want to engage in a totally non refining discussion about what I saw and some questions I have because of that observation.
First, it was a cloudy day in Charleston on the day of the eclipse but had there not been clouds, I would have never noticed this. Around 2 on the day of the eclipse the clouds broke up enough for the sun to be peeking in and out among the clouds. Come the time of the actual eclipse, there was spotty cloud cover but thin enough to look at the sun with the glasses and see the moon eclipsing the sun. But looking around as the moon progressively blocked more and more sun, I noticed that until the sun was about 95% eclipsed, the darkness that fell was no more than a cloudy day before a big rain. When the sun was about 95% eclipsed it was noticeably darker and it went to full dark and 2 minutes later emerged on the other side of the moon and appeared to be just another cloudy day dark within about 10 minutes.
What I realized was that clouds often block the similar amount of daylight as a 95% eclipse. I always knew clouds block the sun but never realised how much they block it until I witnessed a full solar eclipse and could relate the darkness progression to the actual percentage of blockage by the moon in an eclipse.
So my question. One of the effects of climate change is the increase of atmospheric moisture in the air. Estimated at 7% more moisture per ºC increase in temperature. So if the atmosphere is holding more moisture, it is making more clouds. And since clouds are so effective at blocking sunlight from hitting the earth (as I learned from observing the eclipse). Why doesn't the increased cloud cover have a cooling effect on the planet?
Just to give you an idea of the cloud cover we had, I shot this photo as the sun emerged after the full eclipse. Because of the cloud cover this could be shot without a filter, hence the blue color.