• Andrich, M. A., and J. Imberger, 2013: The effect of land clearing on rainfall and fresh water resources in Western Australia: A multi-functional sustainability analysis. Int. J. Sustainable Dev. World Ecol., 20, 549563, https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2013.850752.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Boers, N., N. Marwan, H. M. J. Barbosa, and J. Kurths, 2017: A deforestation-induced tipping point for the South American monsoon system. Sci. Rep., 7, 41489, https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41489.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Boos, W. R., and T. Storelvmo, 2016: Reply to Levermann et al.: Linear scaling for monsoons based on well-verified balance between adiabatic cooling and latent heat release. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, E2350E2351, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1603626113.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chikoore, H., and M. R. Jury, 2010: Intraseasonal variability of satellite-derived rainfall and vegetation over Southern Africa. Earth Interact., 14, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010EI267.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gorshkov, V. G., A. M. Makarieva, and A. V. Nefiodov, 2012: Condensation of water vapor in the gravitational field. J. Exp. Theor. Phys., 115, 723728, https://doi.org/10.1134/S106377611209004X.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Herzschuh, U., J. Borkowski, J. Schewe, S. Mischke, and F. Tian, 2014: Moisture-advection feedback supports strong early-to-mid Holocene monsoon climate on the eastern Tibetan Plateau as inferred from a pollen-based reconstruction. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol., 402, 4454, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.02.022.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jaramillo, A., O. J. Mesa, and D. J. Raymond, 2018: Is condensation-induced atmospheric dynamics a new theory of the origin of the winds? J. Atmos. Sci., 75, 33053312, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-17-0293.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Levermann, A., J. Schewe, V. Petoukhov, and H. Held, 2009: Basic mechanism for abrupt monsoon transitions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 106, 20 57220 577, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0901414106.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Levermann, A., V. Petoukhov, J. Schewe, and H. J. Schellnhuber, 2016: Abrupt monsoon transitions as seen in paleorecords can be explained by moisture-advection feedback. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, E2348E2349, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1603130113.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lorenz, E. N., 1955: Available potential energy and the maintenance of the general circulation. Tellus, 7, 157167, https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v7i2.8796.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., and V. G. Gorshkov, 2007: Biotic pump of atmospheric moisture as driver of the hydrological cycle on land. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 10131033, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-11-1013-2007.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., and V. G. Gorshkov, 2009: Condensation-induced kinematics and dynamics of cyclones, hurricanes and tornadoes. Phys. Lett., 373A, 42014205, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2009.09.023.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., and V. G. Gorshkov, 2010: The biotic pump: Condensation, atmospheric dynamics and climate. Int. J. Water, 5, 365385, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJW.2010.038729.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., and V. G. Gorshkov, 2011: Radial profiles of velocity and pressure for condensation-induced hurricanes. Phys. Lett., 375A, 10531058, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2011.01.005.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, and A. V. Nefiodov, 2011: Condensational theory of stationary tornadoes. Phys. Lett., 375A, 22592261, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2011.04.023.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, and B.-L. Li, 2013a: Revisiting forest impact on atmospheric water vapor transport and precipitation. Theor. Appl. Climatol., 111, 7996, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-012-0643-9.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, D. Sheil, A. D. Nobre, and B.-L. Li, 2013b: Where do winds come from? A new theory on how water vapor condensation influences atmospheric pressure and dynamics. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 10391056, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1039-2013.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, and A. V. Nefiodov, 2014a: Condensational power of air circulation in the presence of a horizontal temperature gradient. Phys. Lett., 378A, 294298, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2013.11.019.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, D. Sheil, A. D. Nobre, P. Bunyard, and B.-L. Li, 2014b: Why does air passage over forest yield more rain? Examining the coupling between rainfall, pressure, and atmospheric moisture content. J. Hydrometeor., 15, 411426, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-12-0190.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, A. V. Nefiodov, D. Sheil, A. D. Nobre, P. Bunyard, P. Nobre, and B.-L. Li, 2017: The equations of motion for moist atmospheric air. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 122, 73007307, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026773.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Poveda, G., L. Jaramillo, and L. F. Vallejo, 2014: Seasonal precipitation patterns along pathways of South American low-level jets and aerial rivers. Water Resour. Res., 50, 98118, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR014087.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • View in gallery

    Momentum exchange among gas molecules (open circles: dry air; filled circles: water vapor; dashed frame denotes the considered unit volume). (a) The cartoon is a reminder that all types of molecules collide with each other (arrows show the chaotic velocities of molecular motion). (b) The gradient of water vapor is perturbed from the initial equilibrium state in (a) by an instantaneous removal of water vapor from the upper quarter of the vessel; the gradient of dry air is not perturbed; and within the unit volume, nothing changes either—in particular, interactions between the molecules remain the same. In this case, Eqs. (5) and (6) would lead to the unphysical scenario where only water vapor will accelerate upward to fill the void, while the dry air as a whole will remain motionless.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 117 117 11
PDF Downloads 98 98 12

Comments on “Is Condensation-Induced Atmospheric Dynamics a New Theory of the Origin of the Winds?”

View More View Less
  • a Theoretical Physics Division, Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Saint Petersburg, Russia
  • | b U.S. Department of Agriculture–China Ministry of Science and Technology Joint Research Center for AgroEcology and Sustainability, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, California
  • | c Centro de Ciência do Sistema Terrestre, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais, São José dos Campos, Brazil
  • | d Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway
  • | e Center for Weather Forecast and Climate Studies, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais, São José dos Campos, Brazil
© Get Permissions
Full access

Abstract

Here we respond to Jaramillo et al.’s recent critique of condensation-induced atmospheric dynamics (CIAD). We show that CIAD is consistent with Newton’s laws while Jaramillo et al.’s analysis is invalid. To address implied objections, we explain our different formulations of “evaporative force.” The essential concept of CIAD is condensation’s role in powering atmospheric circulation. We briefly highlight why this concept is necessary and useful.

Deceased.

© 2019 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: A. M. Makarieva, ammakarieva@gmail.com

The original article that was the subject of this comment/reply can be found at http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JAS-D-17-0293.1.

Abstract

Here we respond to Jaramillo et al.’s recent critique of condensation-induced atmospheric dynamics (CIAD). We show that CIAD is consistent with Newton’s laws while Jaramillo et al.’s analysis is invalid. To address implied objections, we explain our different formulations of “evaporative force.” The essential concept of CIAD is condensation’s role in powering atmospheric circulation. We briefly highlight why this concept is necessary and useful.

Deceased.

© 2019 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: A. M. Makarieva, ammakarieva@gmail.com

The original article that was the subject of this comment/reply can be found at http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JAS-D-17-0293.1.

1. Introduction

Jaramillo et al. (2018) critiqued our theory of condensation-induced atmospheric dynamics (CIAD). CIAD results from the difference between evaporation and condensation. While most evaporation occurs at Earth’s surface, and is a slow, widely distributed process, condensation in contrast occurs within the atmospheric volume and, depending on vertical air velocity, can be orders of magnitude more rapid than evaporation. In simplified form, water vapor with partial pressure pυ is added to the atmosphere at the surface and removed at the mean condensation height hγ in air ascending with vertical velocity w. The product pυw/hγ (J m−3 s−1) gives the rate of the release of available potential energy pυ (J m−3) equal to the rate of generation of the kinetic energy of wind (Makarieva and Gorshkov 2009, 2010; Makarieva et al. 2013b, 2014a).

Jaramillo et al. (2018) stated that CIAD modifies the equation of vertical motion such that it violates Newton’s third law. This is incorrect: CIAD constrains the power of atmospheric circulation; it does not modify “the vertical momentum budget” nor any fundamental equations of hydrodynamics. Furthermore, Jaramillo et al.’s (2018) analysis of the equation of vertical motion is invalid.

2. The equation of vertical motion

Jaramillo et al. [2018, their Eq. (8)] write the equation of vertical motion as
Fz=(pdzgρd+Fυd)+(pυzgρυ+Fdυ)=pzgρ+Fυd+Fdυ=ρaz,
where az is the vertical acceleration of air; g is the acceleration of gravity; and pd, pυ, and p=pd+pυ and ρd, ρυ, and ρ=ρd+ρυ denote, respectively, the pressure p and density ρ of dry air, water vapor, and moist air as a whole. The terms grouped in each set of parentheses are interpreted by Jaramillo et al. (2018) as “the forces on each component”—dry air and water vapor. “Internal forces” Fυd and Fdυ are defined as “respectively the force of the vapor on the dry air and the force of the dry air on the vapor,” which cancel because of Newton’s third law: Fυd=Fdυ.
Equation (6) of Jaramillo et al. (2018) gives the definition of the evaporative force fe as introduced by Makarieva and Gorshkov [2007, their Eq. (16)]:
fepυzpυhυ,
where hυRT/Mυg, R is the ideal gas constant, T is temperature, and Mυ is molar mass of water vapor. Force fe quantifies the deviation of the vertical distribution of water vapor from equilibrium (discussed in the next section). Since ρυ=MυNυ and, according to ideal gas law, pυ=NυRT, where Nυ is molar density of water vapor, fe [Eq. (2)] can also be written as
fe=pυzρυg.
Jaramillo et al. (2018) state that “if the air parcel is not undergoing vertical acceleration, then
Fυd=fe,
as defined by (6).” From this, they conclude that CIAD “includes Fυd in the vertical motion equation while omitting Fdυ,” which represents “a clear violation of Newton’s third law.”

This conclusion is not supported by evidence. First, Jaramillo et al. (2018) did not quote any equation from our works that would represent the alleged modified equation of vertical motion. Jaramillo et al. (2018) incorrectly attribute their Eq. (11), which is an adiabatic version of ρaz=p/zρg+Fυd, to Gorshkov et al. (2012). Everywhere in our works, the equation of vertical motion is ρaz=p/zρg; see, for example, Eq. (15) of Makarieva and Gorshkov (2007), where ρaz=p/zρg=fe, and Eqs. (13) and (19) of, respectively, Gorshkov et al. (2012) and Makarieva et al. (2013b), where ρaz=p/zρg=0 (hydrostatic equilibrium). CIAD does not modify the equations of motion.

Second, while Jaramillo et al. (2018) characterize their analysis as “rigorous,” they do not explain how their key statement—Eq. (4)—was obtained. Indeed, Fdυ and Fυd cancel and thus cannot be retrieved from Eq. (1). We speculate that Jaramillo et al. (2018) separated the equation of motion [Eq. (1)] into two “component” equations, for water vapor and dry air:
ρυazυ=pυzρυg+Fdυ=fe+Fdυ,
ρdazd=pdzρdg+Fυd,
where azυ and azd are vertical accelerations of water vapor and dry air. Our suggestion is supported by Jaramillo et al. (2018, p. 3307) interpreting fe [Eq. (2)] as “a force on the water vapor component.” If, as Jaramillo et al. (2018) assume, “the air parcel is not undergoing vertical acceleration,” azυ=azd=0 and Eq. (4) follows from Eq. (5) and Fdυ=Fυd.

The problem with this assumed derivation is that Eqs. (5) and (6) are incorrect. Separate equations of motion can be justified for such components of moist air as the gas and the condensate as they have distinct velocities (Makarieva et al. 2017), but not for the various components of a mixture of ideal gases that all move at the same velocity. In the case of Eqs. (5) and (6), the error is to assume that pd/z, the partial pressure gradient of dry air, acts exclusively on dry air, while the partial pressure gradient of water vapor pυ/z acts exclusively on water vapor.

Molecules of all gases adjacent to the considered unit volume of moist air collide and exchange momentum: dry air and water vapor molecules outside the volume collide with both dry air and water vapor molecules within it (Fig. 1a). The difference in the rates of these collisions above and below the volume determines the vertical pressure gradient p/z, which is an external force acting on the considered air volume. The vertical difference in the rates of collisions of water vapor molecules outside with any molecules within determines pυ/z, which is likewise an external force acting on the same air volume. Thus, when pυ/z is perturbed, all air, and not just the water vapor, will accelerate (Fig. 1b).

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

Momentum exchange among gas molecules (open circles: dry air; filled circles: water vapor; dashed frame denotes the considered unit volume). (a) The cartoon is a reminder that all types of molecules collide with each other (arrows show the chaotic velocities of molecular motion). (b) The gradient of water vapor is perturbed from the initial equilibrium state in (a) by an instantaneous removal of water vapor from the upper quarter of the vessel; the gradient of dry air is not perturbed; and within the unit volume, nothing changes either—in particular, interactions between the molecules remain the same. In this case, Eqs. (5) and (6) would lead to the unphysical scenario where only water vapor will accelerate upward to fill the void, while the dry air as a whole will remain motionless.

Citation: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 76, 7; 10.1175/JAS-D-18-0358.1

Since the external forces in Eqs. (5) and (6) are incorrectly specified by Jaramillo et al. (2018), Eqs. (5) and (6) are also incorrect as equations of motion: the sum of the forces on the right-hand side of these equations, taken per unit mass, is not equal to accelerations azυ and azd. Therefore, Fυd cannot be retrieved from the condition azd=azυ=0 and remains unspecified. With Fυd unspecified, Jaramillo et al.’s (2018) conclusion that CIAD “includes Fυd in the vertical motion equation while omitting Fdυ” is meaningless.

3. CIAD and potential energy

Jaramillo et al. [2018, their Eqs. (6) and (7)] correctly note that we used two different expressions for the evaporative force fe in our publications. We use this opportunity to clarify. Because of the condensation that occurs in rising moist air, the negative partial pressure gradient of saturated water vapor is several times larger than its weight. Makarieva and Gorshkov (2007) proposed that the resulting “evaporative force” fe drives atmospheric motion:
fepυzρυg=pυhc(hυhchυ),hcRT2LΓhυRTMυg,
where L (J mol−1) is the latent heat of vaporization and ΓT/z. The magnitude of
Δp(z)zfedzpυ(z)
(J m−3) was interpreted as a store of potential energy available for conversion to kinetic energy (Makarieva and Gorshkov 2009, 2010). An analogy is a spring compressed from an equilibrium state with length hυ to hc<hυ; this spring decompresses in the upward direction until Hooke’s force associated with its deformation (pυ/z) becomes balanced by spring’s weight (ρυg).
The magnitude of the available potential energy depends on how the state with minimum potential energy is defined (Lorenz 1955). Definition (7) assumes that such a minimum corresponds to a static atmosphere where every ith gas with partial pressure pi and molar mass Mi has its own scale height hipi/(pi/z)=RT/Mig. In the real atmosphere, very small motions are sufficient to counteract molecular diffusion and keep the air well mixed: in the absence of condensation, the air molar mass M is independent of altitude, and all gases have the same scale height hi=h=RT/Mg. Accordingly, in later CIAD publications, the definition of the evaporative force (also termed the “evaporative–condensational” or “condensational” force) was modified, with hυ in definition (7) replaced by h [Gorshkov et al. 2012, their Eq. (15)]:
fepυhcpυh=pυhγ,
where
1hγ1γγz=1hc1h,γpυp.
Equation (9) attributes the minimum of condensation-related potential energy to well-mixed air. By analogy, the state with minimum available potential energy as defined by Lorenz (1955) is not a static isothermal atmosphere, but an atmosphere with an adiabatic vertical lapse rate, which requires some motion. Defining fe as in Eq. (9) likewise presumes that some small motion (not generated by condensation) is required to keep M=const and hi=h.
The key statement of CIAD is that condensation provides power to atmospheric circulation: the rate at which the kinetic energy of wind is generated is equal to the rate at which the condensation-related potential energy is released. The latter rate is equal to the work per unit time vfe=wfe of the evaporative force, where v and w are the total and vertical air velocities. It is in this sense that the evaporative force drives winds. Accordingly, the key equation of CIAD is the equality between wfe and the local rate of generation of kinetic energy (and, in the steady state, its dissipation). For a hydrostatic atmosphere, this equation takes the form
wpυhγ=up,
where u is the horizontal velocity (v = w + u); see Eqs. (4), (17), and (5) of, respectively, Makarieva and Gorshkov (2009, 2010, 2011), Eq. (16) of Gorshkov et al. (2012), and Eq. (37) of Makarieva et al. (2013b). Equation (11) presumes that condensation is associated with the vertical movement and temperature gradient.

We have shown that Eq. (11) can explain and describe the observed wind and pressure profiles in hurricanes and tornadoes (Makarieva and Gorshkov 2009, 2011; Makarieva et al. 2011). When Eq. (11) is generalized to account for horizontal temperature gradients (Makarieva and Gorshkov 2010; Makarieva et al. 2014a), it can also explain the wind power in the Amazon rain forest (Makarieva et al. 2014b). The global integral of Eq. (11) produces an estimate of condensation-driven global circulation power that likewise matches observations (Makarieva et al. 2013b).

4. Conclusions

While Jaramillo et al.’s (2018) criticisms are unsupported, we value any interest and discussion of CIAD and its implications. As in the steady-state kinetic energy production is balanced by dissipation, CIAD by constraining atmospheric power can guide the parameterization of turbulence (which in current models is fitted to observations). Furthermore, CIAD implies that removing major terrestrial sources of water vapor, for example, through deforestation, will influence atmospheric circulation, modify ocean-to-land moisture transport, and impact the terrestrial water cycle (Makarieva and Gorshkov 2007; Makarieva et al. 2013a, 2014b).

Many observation-based studies have shown a significant impact of vegetation cover on ocean-to-land circulation and moisture import (e.g., Levermann et al. 2009; Chikoore and Jury 2010; Andrich and Imberger 2013; Poveda et al. 2014; Herzschuh et al. 2014; Levermann et al. 2016; Boers et al. 2017). The relevant discussions are controversial, since current circulation models cannot explain abrupt changes in air circulation following changes in vegetation (e.g., Levermann et al. 2016; Boos and Storelvmo 2016). If modeled turbulence could be reparameterized so as to account for CIAD, we expect the simulated atmospheric reactions to vegetation degradation/recovery to become more realistic, resolving the mismatch between models and observations.

Acknowledgments

This work is partially supported by the University of California Agricultural Experiment Station, Australian Research Council Project DP160102107, and the CNPq/CT-Hidro–GeoClima Project Grant 404158/2013-7. We thank two anonymous referees for useful comments. Any further discussion ensuing from this exchange will be listed online (at bioticregulation.ru/ciad).

REFERENCES

  • Andrich, M. A., and J. Imberger, 2013: The effect of land clearing on rainfall and fresh water resources in Western Australia: A multi-functional sustainability analysis. Int. J. Sustainable Dev. World Ecol., 20, 549563, https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2013.850752.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Boers, N., N. Marwan, H. M. J. Barbosa, and J. Kurths, 2017: A deforestation-induced tipping point for the South American monsoon system. Sci. Rep., 7, 41489, https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41489.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Boos, W. R., and T. Storelvmo, 2016: Reply to Levermann et al.: Linear scaling for monsoons based on well-verified balance between adiabatic cooling and latent heat release. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, E2350E2351, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1603626113.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chikoore, H., and M. R. Jury, 2010: Intraseasonal variability of satellite-derived rainfall and vegetation over Southern Africa. Earth Interact., 14, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010EI267.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gorshkov, V. G., A. M. Makarieva, and A. V. Nefiodov, 2012: Condensation of water vapor in the gravitational field. J. Exp. Theor. Phys., 115, 723728, https://doi.org/10.1134/S106377611209004X.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Herzschuh, U., J. Borkowski, J. Schewe, S. Mischke, and F. Tian, 2014: Moisture-advection feedback supports strong early-to-mid Holocene monsoon climate on the eastern Tibetan Plateau as inferred from a pollen-based reconstruction. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol., 402, 4454, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.02.022.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jaramillo, A., O. J. Mesa, and D. J. Raymond, 2018: Is condensation-induced atmospheric dynamics a new theory of the origin of the winds? J. Atmos. Sci., 75, 33053312, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-17-0293.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Levermann, A., J. Schewe, V. Petoukhov, and H. Held, 2009: Basic mechanism for abrupt monsoon transitions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 106, 20 57220 577, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0901414106.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Levermann, A., V. Petoukhov, J. Schewe, and H. J. Schellnhuber, 2016: Abrupt monsoon transitions as seen in paleorecords can be explained by moisture-advection feedback. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, E2348E2349, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1603130113.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lorenz, E. N., 1955: Available potential energy and the maintenance of the general circulation. Tellus, 7, 157167, https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v7i2.8796.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., and V. G. Gorshkov, 2007: Biotic pump of atmospheric moisture as driver of the hydrological cycle on land. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 10131033, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-11-1013-2007.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., and V. G. Gorshkov, 2009: Condensation-induced kinematics and dynamics of cyclones, hurricanes and tornadoes. Phys. Lett., 373A, 42014205, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2009.09.023.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., and V. G. Gorshkov, 2010: The biotic pump: Condensation, atmospheric dynamics and climate. Int. J. Water, 5, 365385, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJW.2010.038729.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., and V. G. Gorshkov, 2011: Radial profiles of velocity and pressure for condensation-induced hurricanes. Phys. Lett., 375A, 10531058, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2011.01.005.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, and A. V. Nefiodov, 2011: Condensational theory of stationary tornadoes. Phys. Lett., 375A, 22592261, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2011.04.023.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, and B.-L. Li, 2013a: Revisiting forest impact on atmospheric water vapor transport and precipitation. Theor. Appl. Climatol., 111, 7996, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-012-0643-9.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, D. Sheil, A. D. Nobre, and B.-L. Li, 2013b: Where do winds come from? A new theory on how water vapor condensation influences atmospheric pressure and dynamics. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 10391056, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1039-2013.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, and A. V. Nefiodov, 2014a: Condensational power of air circulation in the presence of a horizontal temperature gradient. Phys. Lett., 378A, 294298, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2013.11.019.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, D. Sheil, A. D. Nobre, P. Bunyard, and B.-L. Li, 2014b: Why does air passage over forest yield more rain? Examining the coupling between rainfall, pressure, and atmospheric moisture content. J. Hydrometeor., 15, 411426, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-12-0190.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, A. V. Nefiodov, D. Sheil, A. D. Nobre, P. Bunyard, P. Nobre, and B.-L. Li, 2017: The equations of motion for moist atmospheric air. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 122, 73007307, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026773.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Poveda, G., L. Jaramillo, and L. F. Vallejo, 2014: Seasonal precipitation patterns along pathways of South American low-level jets and aerial rivers. Water Resour. Res., 50, 98118, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR014087.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
Save