Longevity of Anthropogenic CO2

[Si modo]

Clathrates

METHANE TRIGGER: Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas which, despite its atmospheric lifetime of around 12 years, none the less has a global warming potential of 62 over 20 years and 21 over 100 years (IPCC, 1996; Berner and Berner, 1996; vanLoon and Duffy, 2000). The sudden release of large amounts of natural gas from methane clathrate deposits is suggested as a cause of past and possibly future climate changes. Events possibly linked in this way are the Permian-Triassic extinction event, the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.

Methane clathrate, also called methane hydrate or methane ice, is a solid form of water that contains a large amount of methane within its crystal structure (clathrate hydrate). Originally thought to occur only in the outer regions of the solar system where temperatures are low and water ice is common, extremely large deposits of methane clathrate have been found under sediments on the ocean floors of Earth. Hydrates only form in a narrow range of depths such as those of continental shelves.


Methane clathrates are common constituents of the shallow marine geosphere

Oh, so now you're just going to post random spam, again, eh?

 

[Old Rocks]

Well, since you did not give a link, how would I know that is what the DOE stated. However, since the highest level of CO2 in the last 650,000 years was about 300 ppm 120K years ago, and the level was 280 150 years ago, and is now 390 ppm, and Isotopol analysis shows that the addition came from fossil fuel, I question what your point is.

Or do you contest the numbers 280 ppm and 390 ppm? On what basis?

Oh, so since 1750 the ONLY CO2 in the atmosphere is from man, eh?

Damn. Just damn.

Simple arithmetic, Rocks - at least it doesn't lie.

Man made CO2 is ~3% of the total CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

No, simple arithmatic does not lie. Here is the graph from that site. Nowhere does it state that ~3% of present atmospheric CO2 is manmade.

In fact, it shows that we have contributed about 40% of the present CO2 in the present atmosphere.

Current Greenhouse Gas Concentrations

GAS Pre-1750 tropospheric concentration1 Recent tropospheric concentration2 GWP3(100-yr time horizon) Atmospheric lifetime4(years) Increased radiative forcing 5 (W/m2)
Concentrations in parts per million (ppm)
Carbon dioxide (CO2) 2806 388.57 1 ~ 1004 1.66
Concentrations in parts per billion (ppb)
Methane (CH4) 7008 18709/17459 25 124 0.48
Nitrous oxide (N2O) 27010 3239/3229 298 1144 0.16
Tropospheric ozone (O3) 251 344,1 n.a.4 hours-days 0.354
Concentrations in parts per trillion (ppt)
CFC-11 (trichlorofluoromethane) (CCl3F) zero 2429/2409 4,750 45 0.063
CFC-12 (CCl2F2) zero 5359/5339 10,900 100 0.17
CF-113(CCl2FFClF2) zero 769/769 6,130 85 0.024
HCFC-22(CHClF2) zero 2179/1909 1,810 12 0.033
HCFC-141b(CH3CCl2F) zero 229/199 725 9.3 0.0025
HCFC-142b(CH3CClF2) zero 229/199 2,310 17.9 0.0031
Halon 1211 (CBrCIF2) zero 4.39/3.89 1,890 16 0.001
Halon 1301 (CBrCIF3) zero 3.39/3.29 7,140 65 0.001
HFC-134a(CH2FCF3) zero 609/499 1,430 14 0.0055
Carbon tetrachloride (CCl4) zero 889/869 1,400 26 0.012
Methyl chloroform (CH3CCl3) zero 8.99/8.69 146 5 0.0011
Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) zero 6.999,11/6.569,11 22,800 3200 0.0029
Other Halocarbons zero Varies by substance collectively 0.021

 

[Old Rocks]

Hey Si, note in your site the atmospheric lifetime they give for CO2.

 

[Big Fitz]

Yes yes... let's all be super scared over 0.06% of 0.04% of the atmospheric composition. How about them water vapor levels? 4% of the atmosphere and a much stronger greenhouse gas. Aren't you worried about the dangers of H20???? Oh the horrors of gaseous water!

Run!

Flee!

Plotz!

Abso-fuckin-lootly reeeeeeDICKulous.

 

[Si modo]

Well, since you did not give a link, how would I know that is what the DOE stated. However, since the highest level of CO2 in the last 650,000 years was about 300 ppm 120K years ago, and the level was 280 150 years ago, and is now 390 ppm, and Isotopol analysis shows that the addition came from fossil fuel, I question what your point is.

Or do you contest the numbers 280 ppm and 390 ppm? On what basis?

Oh, so since 1750 the ONLY CO2 in the atmosphere is from man, eh?

Damn. Just damn.

Simple arithmetic, Rocks - at least it doesn't lie.

Man made CO2 is ~3% of the total CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

No, simple arithmatic does not lie. Here is the graph from that site. Nowhere does it state that ~3% of present atmospheric CO2 is manmade.

In fact, it shows that we have contributed about 40% of the present CO2 in the present atmosphere.

Current Greenhouse Gas Concentrations

GAS Pre-1750 tropospheric concentration1 Recent tropospheric concentration2 GWP3(100-yr time horizon) Atmospheric lifetime4(years) Increased radiative forcing 5 (W/m2)
Concentrations in parts per million (ppm)
Carbon dioxide (CO2) 2806 388.57 1 ~ 1004 1.66
Concentrations in parts per billion (ppb)
Methane (CH4) 7008 18709/17459 25 124 0.48
Nitrous oxide (N2O) 27010 3239/3229 298 1144 0.16
Tropospheric ozone (O3) 251 344,1 n.a.4 hours-days 0.354
Concentrations in parts per trillion (ppt)
CFC-11 (trichlorofluoromethane) (CCl3F) zero 2429/2409 4,750 45 0.063
CFC-12 (CCl2F2) zero 5359/5339 10,900 100 0.17
CF-113(CCl2FFClF2) zero 769/769 6,130 85 0.024
HCFC-22(CHClF2) zero 2179/1909 1,810 12 0.033
HCFC-141b(CH3CCl2F) zero 229/199 725 9.3 0.0025
HCFC-142b(CH3CClF2) zero 229/199 2,310 17.9 0.0031
Halon 1211 (CBrCIF2) zero 4.39/3.89 1,890 16 0.001
Halon 1301 (CBrCIF3) zero 3.39/3.29 7,140 65 0.001
HFC-134a(CH2FCF3) zero 609/499 1,430 14 0.0055
Carbon tetrachloride (CCl4) zero 889/869 1,400 26 0.012
Methyl chloroform (CH3CCl3) zero 8.99/8.69 146 5 0.0011
Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) zero 6.999,11/6.569,11 22,800 3200 0.0029
Other Halocarbons zero Varies by substance collectively 0.021

Oh....

my.....

Gawd.


For example,

368K (around 2001 level, from that page) - 288K (from pre-1750) = 80K

68K (natural contribution) + 12K (man) = 80K

12K/368K * 100% = 3%










Dear God.

 

[Old Rocks]

Look at the graph again. It states 388.5 ppm, not 368 ppm. It ain't 2001 anymore, Dorothy.

And where do you get the 68 ppm natural contribution? That is not on that site.

Doing a Walleyes, and pulling numbers out of your ass?

 

[Si modo]

Look at the graph again. It states 388.5 ppm, not 368 ppm. It ain't 2001 anymore, Dorothy.

And where do you get the 68 ppm natural contribution? That is not on that site.

Doing a Walleyes, and pulling numbers out of your ass?

I don't make up numbers, Rocks. I'm just not that good at it.

I suggest you read the link I provided. I can do some spoonfeeding; but I don't do forcefeeding.

 

[Old Rocks]

Clathrates

METHANE TRIGGER: Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas which, despite its atmospheric lifetime of around 12 years, none the less has a global warming potential of 62 over 20 years and 21 over 100 years (IPCC, 1996; Berner and Berner, 1996; vanLoon and Duffy, 2000). The sudden release of large amounts of natural gas from methane clathrate deposits is suggested as a cause of past and possibly future climate changes. Events possibly linked in this way are the Permian-Triassic extinction event, the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.

Methane clathrate, also called methane hydrate or methane ice, is a solid form of water that contains a large amount of methane within its crystal structure (clathrate hydrate). Originally thought to occur only in the outer regions of the solar system where temperatures are low and water ice is common, extremely large deposits of methane clathrate have been found under sediments on the ocean floors of Earth. Hydrates only form in a narrow range of depths such as those of continental shelves.


Methane clathrates are common constituents of the shallow marine geosphere

Oh, so now you're just going to post random spam, again, eh?

That post concerns Ian and climatic triggers in the past. Not that you would have any knowledge of such. Just for your education;

NOAA Paleoclimatology Program - Educational Outreach, Introduction to Paleoclimatology

 

[Old Rocks]

Look at the graph again. It states 388.5 ppm, not 368 ppm. It ain't 2001 anymore, Dorothy.

And where do you get the 68 ppm natural contribution? That is not on that site.

Doing a Walleyes, and pulling numbers out of your ass?

I don't make up numbers, Rocks. I'm just not that good at it.

I suggest you read the link I provided. I can do some spoonfeeding; but I don't do forcefeeding.

In other words, you pulled it out of your ass.

 

[Si modo]

Clathrates

METHANE TRIGGER: Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas which, despite its atmospheric lifetime of around 12 years, none the less has a global warming potential of 62 over 20 years and 21 over 100 years (IPCC, 1996; Berner and Berner, 1996; vanLoon and Duffy, 2000). The sudden release of large amounts of natural gas from methane clathrate deposits is suggested as a cause of past and possibly future climate changes. Events possibly linked in this way are the Permian-Triassic extinction event, the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.

Methane clathrate, also called methane hydrate or methane ice, is a solid form of water that contains a large amount of methane within its crystal structure (clathrate hydrate). Originally thought to occur only in the outer regions of the solar system where temperatures are low and water ice is common, extremely large deposits of methane clathrate have been found under sediments on the ocean floors of Earth. Hydrates only form in a narrow range of depths such as those of continental shelves.


Methane clathrates are common constituents of the shallow marine geosphere

Oh, so now you're just going to post random spam, again, eh?

That post concerns Ian and climatic triggers in the past. Not that you would have any knowledge of such. Just for your education;

NOAA Paleoclimatology Program - Educational Outreach, Introduction to Paleoclimatology

Hey, if your original topic and claims since then aren't working for you, post whatever random stuff that you think will work for something.

It's your train wreck, so who am I to point out the errors?

 

[Big Fitz]

Oh, so now you're just going to post random spam, again, eh?

That post concerns Ian and climatic triggers in the past. Not that you would have any knowledge of such. Just for your education;

NOAA Paleoclimatology Program - Educational Outreach, Introduction to Paleoclimatology

Hey, if your original topic and claims since then aren't working for you, post whatever random stuff that you think will work for something.

It's your train wreck, so who am I to point out the errors?

Next he's going to worry about Yttrium levels in the soil being too high and all man's fault.

 

[Si modo]

Look at the graph again. It states 388.5 ppm, not 368 ppm. It ain't 2001 anymore, Dorothy.

And where do you get the 68 ppm natural contribution? That is not on that site.

Doing a Walleyes, and pulling numbers out of your ass?

I don't make up numbers, Rocks. I'm just not that good at it.

I suggest you read the link I provided. I can do some spoonfeeding; but I don't do forcefeeding.

In other words, you pulled it out of your ass.

Shall I image the page and post it? Your intellectual laziness is well established. As I said, I've reached my limit of spoonfeeding today. I don't forcefeed.

If you want to claim that the figures aren't there, that's fine. I trust others are not nearly as intellectually lazy as you and can read the entire link.

Also, as you seem to think that natural sources haven't contributed to the increase in atmospheric CO2, that's fine. Funny, but still fine.

As I said, it's your train wreck, as it usually is.

 

[Old Rocks]

64% of the increase from just the burning of fossil fuels
Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) - Frequently Asked Questions

What percentage of the CO2 in the atmosphere has been produced by human beings through the burning of fossil fuels?

A. Anthropogenic CO2 comes from fossil fuel combustion, changes in land use (e.g., forest clearing), and cement manufacture. Houghton and Hackler have estimated land-use changes from 1850-2000, so it is convenient to use 1850 as our starting point for the following discussion. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations had not changed appreciably over the preceding 850 years (IPCC; The Scientific Basis) so it may be safely assumed that they would not have changed appreciably in the 150 years from 1850 to 2000 in the absence of human intervention.

In the following calculations, we will express atmospheric concentrations of CO2 in units of parts per million by volume (ppmv). Each ppmv represents 2.13 X1015 grams, or 2.13 petagrams of carbon (PgC) in the atmosphere. According to Houghton and Hackler, land-use changes from 1850-2000 resulted in a net transfer of 154 PgC to the atmosphere. During that same period, 282 PgC were released by combustion of fossil fuels, and 5.5 additional PgC were released to the atmosphere from cement manufacture. This adds up to 154 + 282 + 5.5 = 441.5 PgC, of which 282/444.1 = 64% is due to fossil-fuel combustion.

 

[westwall]

Geological Society - Back to the future with climate change

Geoscientist 20.05 May 2010

There is huge political and societal concern over, as well as scientific interest in, current climate change and global warming. It comes as something of a surprise, therefore, to discover that we are not learning from past warming episodes with more than a passing similarity to the one we are currently initiating.

One such possibly analogous climate event took place in the early Eocene 55 million years ago and is usually known as the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM). Back in 2007, when I last wrote in these pages about it, the IPCC's newly published fourth scientific assessment skated around the early Eocene-analogue issues. Its chapter on palaeoclimates had a sub-section on it and the chapter on the atmosphere did cover the present carbon isotope excursion (CIE) due to fossil fuel release and deforestation. Otherwise the IPCC does not connect the two – coming closest when it wrote:

“Although there is still too much uncertainty in the data to derive a quantitative estimate of climate sensitivity from the PETM [Palaeocene Eocene Thermal Maximum], the event is a striking example of massive carbon release and related extreme climatic warming.”

One of the preferred theories is that back in the late Palaeocene to early Eocene, volcanic activity caused the realease of greenhouse gases, which warmed the Earth sufficiently to destabilise marine methane hydrates (clathrates) that then further warmed the planet. Because both fossil fuel and methane clathrate carbon is photosynthetically derived (photosynthesis prefers the C-12 isotope) there is a difference in the isotope ratio of both organic and carbonate carbon in sediments of this time, and we can use the resulting carbon isotope excursion (CIE) to estimate how much carbon was involved, and ask: is the current pulse of warming that we have initiated likely to destabilise present-day ocean clathrates in the same way? We do not have to go back as far as the PETM to find indications of methane release from ocean hydrates affecting the climate. Methane clathrate releases may account for some climatic change within the last glacial, and even may have helped take us out of the last glacial maximum towards its end around 18,000 years ago. So even if Milankovitch was the glacial end's “pacemaker”, methane clathrate destabilisation may have been one of the climate amplifiers.

Ahhhhh yes your favourite subject....The only thing that died was one species of Foraminefera (hence the overwrought "extinction event" hysteria) but the rest of the flora and fauna blossomed. The last paragraph is particularly relevent here.

The PETM is accompanied by a mass extinction of 35-50% of benthic foraminifera (especially in deeper waters) over the course of ~1,000 years - the group suffering more than during the dinosaur-slaying K-T extinction. Contrarily, planktonic foraminifera diversified, and dinoflagellates bloomed. Success was also enjoyed by the mammals, who radiated profusely around this time.

The deep-sea extinctions are difficult to explain, as many were regional in extent (mainly affecting the north Atlantic). General hypotheses such as a temperature-related reduction in oxygen availability, or increased corrosiveness due to carbonate-undersaturated deep waters, are insufficient as explanations. The only factor which was global in extent was an increase in temperature, and it appears that the majority of the blame must rest upon its shoulders. Regional extinctions in the North Atlantic can be attributed to increased deep-sea anoxia, which could be due to the slowdown of overturning ocean currents,[12] or the release and rapid oxidation of large amounts of methane.[20][verification needed]

In shallower waters, it's undeniable that increased CO2 levels result in a decreased oceanic pH, which has a profound negative effect on corals.[21] Experiments suggest it is also very harmful to calcifying plankton.[22] However, the strong acids used to simulate the natural increase in acidity which would result from elevated CO2 concentrations may have given misleading results, and the most recent evidence is that coccolithophores (E. huxleyi at least) become more, not less, calcified and abundant in acidic waters.[23] Interestingly, no change in the distribution of calcareous nanoplankton such as the coccolithophores can be attributed to acidification during the PETM.[23] Acidification did lead to an abundance of heavily calcified algae[24] and weakly calcified forams.[25]

The increase in mammalian abundance is intriguing. There is no evidence of any increased extinction rate among the terrestrial biota. Increased CO2 levels may have promoted dwarfing[26] – which may (perhaps?) have encouraged speciation. Many major mammalian orders – including the Artiodactyla, horses, and primates – appeared and spread across the globe 13,000 to 22,000 years after the initiation of the PETM.[26]



Paleocene

 

[Old Rocks]

There, old gal, I posted the page for you. From a link on the site you originally posted. It states 64% of the increase came just from the use of fossil fuels.

 

[westwall]

I don't make up numbers, Rocks. I'm just not that good at it.

I suggest you read the link I provided. I can do some spoonfeeding; but I don't do forcefeeding.

In other words, you pulled it out of your ass.

Shall I image the page and post it? Your intellectual laziness is well established. As I said, I've reached my limit of spoonfeeding today. I don't forcefeed.

If you want to claim that the figures aren't there, that's fine. I trust others are not nearly as intellectually lazy as you and can read the entire link.

Also, as you seem to think that natural sources haven't contributed to the increase in atmospheric CO2, that's fine. Funny, but still fine.

As I said, it's your train wreck, as it usually is.

Yes, by all means you must do everything for olfraud, he is mentally incapable of most normal things. A sad case.

 

[Si modo]

64% of the increase from just the burning of fossil fuels
Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) - Frequently Asked Questions

What percentage of the CO2 in the atmosphere has been produced by human beings through the burning of fossil fuels?

A. Anthropogenic CO2 comes from fossil fuel combustion, changes in land use (e.g., forest clearing), and cement manufacture. Houghton and Hackler have estimated land-use changes from 1850-2000, so it is convenient to use 1850 as our starting point for the following discussion. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations had not changed appreciably over the preceding 850 years (IPCC; The Scientific Basis) so it may be safely assumed that they would not have changed appreciably in the 150 years from 1850 to 2000 in the absence of human intervention.

In the following calculations, we will express atmospheric concentrations of CO2 in units of parts per million by volume (ppmv). Each ppmv represents 2.13 X1015 grams, or 2.13 petagrams of carbon (PgC) in the atmosphere. According to Houghton and Hackler, land-use changes from 1850-2000 resulted in a net transfer of 154 PgC to the atmosphere. During that same period, 282 PgC were released by combustion of fossil fuels, and 5.5 additional PgC were released to the atmosphere from cement manufacture. This adds up to 154 + 282 + 5.5 = 441.5 PgC, of which 282/444.1 = 64% is due to fossil-fuel combustion.

Ummmm, that's 64% of the increase.

I simply am not going to dumb this down any more than I already have.

 

[Old Rocks]

During the PETM extinction event that took place 55 million years ago, the oceans were warming just as they are today.

The 2001 documentary “The Day the Oceans Boiled” examined what was new evidence in 1999. [4] Scientists had discovered that the expected rise in global temperature in the near future could be only the start of a much greater increase. The evidence uncovered warned that our Earth’s temperature could rise by 20 degrees within the next three generations. The documentary follows scientists uncovering evidence for what caused massive, abrupt climate shifts that happened 55 million years ago. *This was the last time the Earth’s temperature accelerated quickly, causing many animals to shrink, with horses becoming the size of modern domestic cats. It took the planet 60,000 years to cool down again.

Sediment samples drilled from the ocean sea floor provide scientists with the ability to uncover what took place in our Earth’s history hundreds of millions of years ago. In 1999, Santo Bains of Oxford University’s Department of Earth Sciences was looking for clues as to what happened 55 million years ago during the Paleocene-Eocene. In particular, he was interested in one specific sediment core named core 690. Core 690 was to have the most detailed record of the Paleocene-Eocene climate change event. Bains took one sediment sample per centimeter of the entire core 690. Buried in the sludge along the bottom of the sea there are stories of the past. Within this sediment there are tiny sea creatures – deep-ocean microscopic foraminifera – that survived the asteroids that killed the dinosaurs. However, 55 million years ago, half of the tiny forams went extinct. Locked in their shells lies the story of why. As their shells were made of the carbon dioxide dissolved in the sea, their detailed composition revealed both the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and the water temperature at the time of extinction. Bains dropped the tiny shells into acid, releasing the carbon dioxide that had last seen the atmosphere 55 million years ago.

Bains’s scientific analysis confirmed that at the time the mammals shrank, the atmospheric carbon levels had suddenly risen abruptly – causing a rapid warming of ocean waters. As he examined more samples, Bains discovered something extraordinary. There was not just one sudden rise in temperature. There were three. Temperatures accelerated dramatically in three succinct steps over a period of just a few of hundred years for a total temperature increase of approximately 8ºC. The rise in atmospheric carbon was just as dramatic. The jumps in Bains’s graph add up to one and a half trillion tonnes of carbon. His discovery was the first time this was recognized in the geological record. Where did all of the carbon come from? Methane hydrates are believed to be the only explanation. Methane hydrates quickly decomposed, releasing vast amounts of carbon into the oceans and into the atmosphere.

 

[Old Rocks]

A lot more than just one specie of foram

http://wzar.unizar.es/perso/alegret/pdfs_publicaciones/Alegret_et_2009b.pdf

a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 30 December 2008
Received in revised form 25 April 2009
Accepted 10 May 2009
Keywords:
Paleocene–Eocene
Warming
Extinction
Benthic foraminifera
Deep-sea
A complete succession of lower bathyal–upper abyssal sediments was deposited across the Paleocene–
Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) at Alamedilla (Betic Cordillera, Southern Spain), where the benthic
foraminiferal turnover and extinction event associated with the negative carbon isotope excursion (CIE)
across the PETM have been investigated. Detailed quantitative analyses of benthic foraminifera allowed us to distinguish assemblages with paleoecological and paleoenvironmental significance: pre-extinction fauna, extinction fauna, survival fauna (including disaster and opportunistic fauna) and recovery fauna.

These assemblages have been associated with significant parts of the δ13C curve for which a relative chronology has been established. The correlation between the benthic turnover, the δ13C curve, the calcite and silicate mineral content, and sedimentation rates, allowed us to establish the sequence of events across the PETM. At Alamedilla, the benthic extinction event (BEE) affected ~37% of the species and it has been recorded over a 30-cm-thick interval that was deposited in c.a. 10 ky, suggesting a gradual but rapid pattern of extinction. The beginning of the BEE coincides with the onset of the CIE (+0 ky) and with an interval with abundant calcite,
and it has been recorded under oxic conditions at the seafloor (as inferred from the benthic foraminiferal assemblages and the reddish colour of the sediments). We conclude that dissolution and dysoxia were not the cause of the extinctions, which were probably related to intense warming that occurred before the onset of the CIE.

The BEE is immediately overlain by a survival interval dominated by agglutinated species (the Glomospira Acme). The low calcite content recorded within the survival interval may result from the interaction between dilution of the carbonate compounds by silicicate minerals (as inferred from the increased sedimentation rates), and the effects of carbonate dissolution triggered by the shoaling of the CCD.We suggest that Glomospira species (disaster fauna) may have bloomed opportunistically in areas with methane dissociation, in and around the North Atlantic. The disaster fauna was rapidly replaced by opportunistic taxa, which point to oxic and, possibly, oligotrophic conditions at the seafloor. The CCD gradually dropped during this interval, and calcite preservation improved towards the recovery interval, during which the δ13C values and the calcite content recovered (c.a. +71.25 to 94.23 ky) and stabilized (N94.23 ky), coeval with a sharp decrease in sedimentation rates.

 

[Si modo]

More of Rocks' Brownian motion.