The surface budget fallacy is a common error in thinking. It involves thinking that an increased concentration could only cause warming by increasing the downward thermal radiation to the surface, as a result of making the atmosphere a better emitter. If the atmosphere near the surface is already nearly opaque to thermal radiation, this would mean that increasing could not lead to higher temperatures. However, it is a mistake to focus on the surface energy budget rather than the top-of-atmosphere energy budget. Regardless of what happens at the surface, increasing the concentration of tends to reduce the thermal radiation reaching space (OLR), leading to a TOA energy imbalance that leads to warming. Earlier researchers like Callendar (1938) and Plass (1959) focused on the surface budget, but the work of Manabe in the 1960s clarified the importance of the top-of-atmosphere energy budget.
The surface budget fallacy is a common error in thinking. It involves thinking that an increased concentration could only cause warming by increasing the downward thermal radiation to the surface, as a result of making the atmosphere a better emitter. If the atmosphere near the surface is already nearly opaque to thermal radiation, this would mean that increasing could not lead to higher temperatures. However, it is a mistake to focus on the surface energy budget rather than the top-of-atmosphere energy budget. Regardless of what happens at the surface, increasing the concentration of tends to reduce the thermal radiation reaching space (OLR), leading to a TOA energy imbalance that leads to warming. Earlier researchers like Callendar (1938) and Plass (1959) focused on the surface budget, but the work of Manabe in the 1960s clarified the importance of the top-of-atmosphere energy budget.