Numbers don't add up for global warming
by Michael J. Myers, Analytical Chemist
As an analytical chemist who works in spectroscopy and atmospheric sensing, I am troubled by the lack of common sense regarding carbon dioxide emissions.
Article continues below this advert:
Our greatest greenhouse gas is water. Atmospheric spectroscopy reveals why water has a 95 percent and CO2 a 3.6 percent contribution to the "greenhouse effect."
Carbon dioxide emissions worldwide each year total 3.2 billion tons. That equals about 0.0168 percent of the atmosphere's CO2 concentration of about 19 trillion tons. This results in a 0.00064 percent increase in the absorption of the sun's radiation. This is an insignificantly small number. The yearly increase is many orders of magnitude smaller than the standard deviation errors for CO2 concentration measurement.
"Scientific" computer simulations predict global warming based on increased greenhouse gas emissions over time. However, without water's contribution taken into account they omit the largest greenhouse gas from their equations.
How can such egregious calculation errors be so blatantly ignored? This is why man-made global warming is "junk" science.
A 1998 scientific study shows that plants in North America's farmlands absorb about 2 billion tons more CO2 than the old forests they replaced. That's 0.5 billion tons more CO2 removed than the 1.5 billion tons generated in 1998 by burning fossil fuels.
Experiments show that higher atmospheric levels of CO2 result in larger and faster growing crops. This provides for more efficient food production and more CO2 removed from the atmosphere.
For a "greener" environment and balanced atmospheric CO2 concentration levels, we all should purchase both carbon credits and carbon debits.
Analytical Chemist: Numbers don't add up for global warming