Carbon dioxide passes symbolic mark(400 ppm)

[ScienceRocks]

Carbon dioxide passes symbolic mark(400 ppm)

BBC News - Carbon dioxide passes symbolic mark

Carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have broken through a symbolic mark.

Daily measurements of CO2 at the authoritative "Keeling lab" on Hawaii have topped 400 parts per million for the first time.

The station, which sits atop the Mauna Loa volcano, has the longest continuous measure of the concentration of the gas, stretching back to 1958.

The last time CO2 was regularly above 400ppm was about 3-5 million years ago - before modern humans existed.

The climate back then was also considerably warmer than it is today, according to scientists.

Carbon dioxide is regarded as the most important of the manmade greenhouse gases, a product principally of burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas.

The usual trend seen at the volcano is for the CO2 concentration to rise in winter months and then to fall back as the northern hemisphere growing season kicks in and pulls some of the gas out of the atmosphere.

This means the number can be expected to decline by a few ppm below 400 in the coming weeks. But the long-term trend is upwards.

 

[ScienceRocks]

May 09 - 400.03ppm

Trends in Carbon Dioxide


We may have one or two days within the next week of it. After that then we will start going down.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Does not make a single bit of fucking difference to anyone who is not a member of the AGW Cult

 

[percysunshine]

Hawaii's electricity grid is powered completely by burning coal. Kind of convenient to take the measurements right next to the emissions source and then just extrapolate to the planet.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The station, which sits atop the Mauna Loa volcano, has the longest continuous measure of the concentration of the gas, stretching back to 1958.

So the station located atop a volcano is producing concentrations of carbon dioxide and this is a translation to manmade greenhouse gases.

It never ends, i tell ya.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Funny thing is the polar regions have higher co2 levels. lol. Co2 is normally 2-3ppm across the planet no matter where.

Northern Alaska hit it last year.

Carbon dioxide at six other remote northern sites in NOAA’s international cooperative air sampling network also reached 400 ppm at least once this spring: at a second site in Alaska and others in Canada, Iceland, Finland, Norway, and an island in the North Pacific.

NOAA: Carbon dioxide levels hit milestone at Arctic sites

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Show me one repeatable laboratory experiment that shows how an increase in CO2 to 400PPM "causes global climate warming change"

One experiment

I've been asking for over 5 years now

 

[percysunshine]

Yet the planets temperature is not increasing ...hmmmm...

 

[Vandalshandle]

There is much lower co2 levels in da Nile....

 

[ScienceRocks]

I blown your volcano theory out of the water
lol

You think they burn enough coal in northern Alaska to make a difference. haha!!!!

Physics tells us that it is a green house gas. A lot smarter people then anyone posting on this board figured it out along time ago. A large part of science is based on math and things we can't experiment within the lab.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

All that CO2 and yet no warming in over ten years. You might want to go back and ask the climate cult what the next talking point is.

 

[boedicca]

The station, which sits atop the Mauna Loa volcano, has the longest continuous measure of the concentration of the gas, stretching back to 1958.

So the station located atop a volcano is producing concentrations of carbon dioxide and this is a translation to manmade greenhouse gases.

It never ends, i tell ya.

I love how the article also notes that scientists believe that the temperature "millions of years ago" was warmer than today. So, what's the big deal?

We are carbon based life forms. We exhale carbon dioxide. Plants absorb it. More CO 2 = More plants. One would think the greenies would like that.

 

[ScienceRocks]

All that CO2 and yet no warming in over ten years. You might want to go back and ask the climate cult what the next talking point is.

One needs to understand the variables of a graph to understand it's shape. Let me show you them.--->
1991; we had a huge volcano. This dropped temperature enough in which it took 4-5 years to completely recover. This is why the 1990's look like they're warming near .2c/decade.
1998 had nearly 4c anomalies within the Pacific. HOLY SHIT. This nino was a once every 100 year event. Going from this point to measure today isn't wise.
2002-2007 had a warm/neutral pattern that allowed for warm then means temperatures each of those years.
2008-2013 all had nina's or neutral global enso set-ups. Even 2010 ended up more or less neutral when you consider the nino and nina canceling each other out. This means COLD Temperatures(stable look to the graph) when compared to 2002-2007.

The question you should ask is why after 5 cold years within the enso we can match 2002, 2004, 2005 without any trouble. 2002 and 2006 being moderate nino's strong enough to fuck up the cane seasons each. Many months are already busting 2009 which was also a moderate nino towards the end. Not overall a nino year in the sense of 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1987, 1992 ,1998, 2002, 2006, etc.

 

[KissMy]

We were told that 350ppm was the point of no return. Why are they still blathering on about 400ppm? The US reduced it's carbon footprint 7 years ago, but China & India exploded theirs driving the planet far beyond the 350ppm point of no return.

 

[ScienceRocks]

We were told that 350ppm was the point of no return. Why are they still blathering on about 400ppm? The US reduced it's carbon footprint 7 years ago, but China & India exploded theirs driving the planet far beyond the 350ppm point of no return.

We're the highest in over 3 million years for co2. 320 is pretty much the highest we've been at maximum since.

"Recent estimates suggest CO2 levels reached as much as 415 parts per million (ppm) during the Pliocene. With that came global average temperatures that eventually reached 3 or 4 degrees C (5.4-7.2 degrees F) higher than today’s and as much as 10 degrees C (18 degrees F) warmer at the poles. Sea level ranged between five and 40 meters (16 to 131 feet) higher than today." Carbon-dioxide levels are at their highest point in at least 800,000 years


This is a much better graph as it factors in all the variables. Funny about your graph is it only shows the volcano rebound!!!! haha

There's two reasons I choose 1979-1981 and 2008-2013 as beginning points of this graph.
1# It completely avoids that volcano's!
2# GISS/NOAA data base shows similar warming since 1972-1975...So 1979-1980 isn't a bad start point. It isn't like it is a extreme year like your side likes to use.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The graph above makes sense when you factor in all variables. The one shown above mine only shows only the volcano and maybe the big fucking nino!

 

[waltky]

'Hothouse Earth' risks even if CO2 emissions slashed...

Climate change: 'Hothouse Earth' risks even if CO2 emissions slashed
6 August 2018 - It may sound like the title of a low budget sci-fi movie, but for planetary scientists, "Hothouse Earth" is a deadly serious concept.

Researchers believe we could soon cross a threshold leading to boiling hot temperatures and towering seas in the centuries to come. Even if countries succeed in meeting their CO2 targets, we could still lurch on to this "irreversible pathway". Their study shows it could happen if global temperatures rise by 2C. An international team of climate researchers, writing in the journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, says the warming expected in the next few decades could turn some of the Earth's natural forces - that currently protect us - into our enemies.

Each year the Earth's forests, oceans and land soak up about 4.5 billion tonnes of carbon that would otherwise end up in our atmosphere adding to temperatures. But as the world experiences warming, these carbon sinks could become sources of carbon and make the problems of climate change significantly worse. So whether it is the permafrost in northern latitudes that now holds millions of tonnes of warming gases, or the Amazon rainforest, the fear is that the closer we get to 2 degrees of warming above pre-industrial levels, the greater the chances that these natural allies will spew out more carbon than they currently now take in.

Many parts of the world would be significantly disrupted in a Hothouse Earth scenario​

Back in 2015, governments of the world committed themselves to keeping temperature rises well below 2 degrees, and to strive to keep them under 1.5. According to the authors, the current plans to cut carbon may not be enough if their analysis is correct. "What we are saying is that when we reach 2 degrees of warming, we may be at a point where we hand over the control mechanism to Planet Earth herself," co-author Prof Johan Rockström, from the Stockholm Resilience Centre, told BBC News. "We are the ones in control right now, but once we go past 2 degrees, we see that the Earth system tips over from being a friend to a foe. We totally hand over our fate to an Earth system that starts rolling out of equilibrium."

Removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, as in this model, will be necessary, say the authors​

Currently, global temperatures have risen about 1 degree above pre-industrial levels and they are rising by around 0.17C per decade. In their new study the authors looked at 10 natural systems, which they term "feedback processes". Right now, these help humanity to avoid the worst impacts of carbon and temperature rises, and include forests, Arctic sea-ice, and methane hydrates on the ocean floor. The worry is that if one of these systems tips over and starts pushing large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, the rest could follow like a row of dominoes.

What exactly is a Hothouse Earth scenario?

 

[Sunsettommy]

'Hothouse Earth' risks even if CO2 emissions slashed...

Climate change: 'Hothouse Earth' risks even if CO2 emissions slashed
6 August 2018 - It may sound like the title of a low budget sci-fi movie, but for planetary scientists, "Hothouse Earth" is a deadly serious concept.

Researchers believe we could soon cross a threshold leading to boiling hot temperatures and towering seas in the centuries to come. Even if countries succeed in meeting their CO2 targets, we could still lurch on to this "irreversible pathway". Their study shows it could happen if global temperatures rise by 2C. An international team of climate researchers, writing in the journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, says the warming expected in the next few decades could turn some of the Earth's natural forces - that currently protect us - into our enemies.

​

Each year the Earth's forests, oceans and land soak up about 4.5 billion tonnes of carbon that would otherwise end up in our atmosphere adding to temperatures. But as the world experiences warming, these carbon sinks could become sources of carbon and make the problems of climate change significantly worse. So whether it is the permafrost in northern latitudes that now holds millions of tonnes of warming gases, or the Amazon rainforest, the fear is that the closer we get to 2 degrees of warming above pre-industrial levels, the greater the chances that these natural allies will spew out more carbon than they currently now take in.

Many parts of the world would be significantly disrupted in a Hothouse Earth scenario​

Back in 2015, governments of the world committed themselves to keeping temperature rises well below 2 degrees, and to strive to keep them under 1.5. According to the authors, the current plans to cut carbon may not be enough if their analysis is correct. "What we are saying is that when we reach 2 degrees of warming, we may be at a point where we hand over the control mechanism to Planet Earth herself," co-author Prof Johan Rockström, from the Stockholm Resilience Centre, told BBC News. "We are the ones in control right now, but once we go past 2 degrees, we see that the Earth system tips over from being a friend to a foe. We totally hand over our fate to an Earth system that starts rolling out of equilibrium."

Removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, as in this model, will be necessary, say the authors​

Currently, global temperatures have risen about 1 degree above pre-industrial levels and they are rising by around 0.17C per decade. In their new study the authors looked at 10 natural systems, which they term "feedback processes". Right now, these help humanity to avoid the worst impacts of carbon and temperature rises, and include forests, Arctic sea-ice, and methane hydrates on the ocean floor. The worry is that if one of these systems tips over and starts pushing large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, the rest could follow like a row of dominoes.

What exactly is a Hothouse Earth scenario?

Another stupid politically based science paper since it was at least that much warmer early in the interglacial, much warmer in the PREVIOUS interglacial, yet no beginning evidence that it near a run away warming trend.