The reason I am making this thread is because I have a question regarding predicted temperatures of planets based on their area, distance from the sun, and albedo. Going by the planetary equilibrium temperature, T4 = [L(1-a)]/(16σπD2), I have seen numerous websites state that Venus would actually be colder than Earth if it had no atmosphere, despite it being closer to the sun. The main factor for this is its albedo (L is constant, and a smaller D to the sun would actually make Venus warmer by this equation, so albedo must be the deciding factor that makes Venus colder without an atmosphere). One such website: https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/energybalance/planetarytemperatures.html (these numbers show up in many articles on this topic) However, I have also read that a part of why Venus' albedo has its value is because of its atmosphere. This paper speaks about that: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2011JCLI3946.1 So, it appears that atmosphere has an affect on albedo. If that is the case, why are people who calculate what the temperature of planets would be without an atmosphere using the actual albedo of those planets? I've done the calculation myself with a chosen albedo of .12 (that of Mercury and the Moon) to hold it constant, and as expected Venus is hotter. So if albedo depends on atmosphere, why is everyone who does this calculation for temperature without an atmosphere just using the known albedos? Shouldn't they be taking the dependence of albedo on atmosphere into account if they are calculating what a planet with no atmosphere would be like? Am I totally wrong here? Thanks.