Articles Tagged "CO2 Level"

It is well known that carbon dioxide cannot directly account for the observed increase in global temperature over the past century. This has led climate scientists to theorize that many feedback relationships exists within the climate system, serving to amplify the impact of rising CO2 levels. One of these is the impact of rising temperature on the ability of the ecosystem to absorb CO2. The temperature sensitivity of ecosystem respiratory processes (referred to as Q10) is a key determinant of the interaction between climate and the carbon cycle. New research, recently published in the journal Science, shows that the Q10 of ecosystem respiration is invariant with respect to mean annual temperature, and independent of the analyzed ecosystem type. This newly discovered temperature insensitivity suggests that climate sensitivity to CO2 is much smaller than assumed by climate models.

Climate sensitivity is generally given as how much temperature rise would result from a doubling of atmospheric CO2 levels. Using IPCC figures for radiative forcing, a doubling of CO2 would lead to a temperature rise of about half a degree (see “Another Look at Climate Sensitivity”). Yet the UN IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) gives a much higher value for climate sensitivity. It claims a 2°C to 4.5°C rise for a CO2 doubling, or from four to nine times higher than what is see in the real climate system. Why? Climate models assume that there are large positive feedbacks as Earth warms. Among these feedbacks is the impact of rising temperature on emission and absorption of CO2 by Earth's biota.

Accurately predicting future levels of atmospheric CO2 requires a clear understanding of how land and atmosphere exchange CO2. Each year, photosynthesizing land plants remove (fix) one in eight molecules of atmospheric CO2. Land plants and soil organisms return a similar amount of the dreaded greenhouse gas. The balance between removal and respiration determines whether terrestrial ecosystems are a net carbon sink or source. Two papers in the August 13, 2010, issue of Science bring a new understanding of land-atmosphere CO2 exchange.

Click source to read FULL report from Doug L. Hoffman

SPPI’s authoritative Monthly CO2 Reports have been providing hard, real-world data about changes in CO2 concentration, temperature, sea ice, hurricane activity, and many other climate indicators for two years. These regular reports, now widely cited on television, in universities, and in Congress, have proven highly embarrassing to climate extremists.

Our graphs show that the climate is responding normally, and that neither CO2 concentration nor temperature is rising anything like as fast as the UN’s climate panel had predicted.

Now the extremists are seeking to dismiss our CO2 concentration and temperature graphs as incorrect in various respects. This short note answers some of the inappropriate criticisms currently circulating on the extremist blogs.

Click source to download PDF file from SPPI

Determination of the Effective Total Emissivity of the Carbon Dioxide in the Venusian Atmosphere, and the Mean Free Path Length and Crossing Lapse (Delay) Time of Photons into the Troposphere of Venus.

Abstract
This assessment on the effective total emissivity of the carbon dioxide in Venus, and the mean free path length and the crossing lapse time of photons through the Venusian atmosphere demonstrate the ―greenhouse‖ effect in Venus does not exist.

Introduction
Logic does not always reveal the truth behind natural phenomena. For example, if a rooster crowed at midnight and an hour later rain began to fall, one might logically deduce that the rooster was somehow sensitive to impending precipitation. If the rooster crowed again, and two hours later a tornado demolishes the barn, one might logically deduce that the rooster was somehow capable of predicting the occurrence of tornados. However, we know that the rooster is not a meteorologist and that he can barely comprehend the world around him.

By the same logic, one might deduce that Venus is hotter than Mercury and Earth because it holds 43.56 x 10^17 tons of carbon dioxide in its atmosphere (around 95% of the composition of the atmosphere of Venus). As a matter of fact, this is one of the main arguments, which is often wielded by the proponents of the anthropogenic climate change and global warming (CAGW) in support of their ideas. Nevertheless, scientific truth is not on their side — as we shall see.

CLICK to download PDF and read FULL report from Dr. Nasif S. Nahle

Most descriptions of the 'greenhouse effect' are similar to that offered by Wikipedia: "If an ideal thermally conductive blackbody was the same distance from the Sun as the Earth, it would have an expected blackbody temperature of 5.3°C. However, since the Earth reflects about 30%... of the incoming sunlight, the planet's actual blackbody temperature is about -18 or -19°C, about 33°C below the actual surface temperature of about 14 °C or 15 °C. The mechanism that produces this difference between the actual temperature and the blackbody temperature is due to the atmosphere and is known as the greenhouse effect."

This calculation is based upon the Stefan-Boltzmann law, radius of the Sun and Earth, distance between the Sun and Earth, and albedo (reflection, mostly from clouds), from which the following equation is derived:

Click source to read FULL report from the HockeySchtick

Now, as the earth does not become rapidly overheated from CO2 (carbon dioxide) in the atmosphere, nor the Arctic sea ice disappearing, nor the Pacific atolls drowning, nor the Amazonian jungle drying up, all as previously touted by the IPCC and their gendarmes and adjuvants, a new slogan on the supposed danger of CO2 is increasingly being heard, namely “Ocean Acidification”.

The supposedly happening Ocean Acidification, frequently termed “the other effect of CO2”, is largely based on unrealistic biological experiments, actual measurements over an insufficient time to allow any definite trend delineation, and a lack of understanding of the chemistry involved.

Oceans and most freshwater bodies are alkaline

Water is acidic if the pH is below 7 and alkaline if it is above 7. The pH of the oceans and most freshwater is approximately 8 to 8.2. The pH fluctuates with the seasons, increasing in spring and summer, decreasing after that. As the level of CO2 in the air is nearly constant, one has to ask:

At www.scienceandpublicpolicy.org I publish a widely-circulated and vigorously-debated Monthly CO2 Report, including graphs showing changes in CO2 concentration and in global mean surface temperature since 1980, when the satellites went on weather watch and the NOAA first published its global CO2 concentration series. Since some commenters here at Wattsup have queried some of our findings, I have asked Anthony to allow me to contribute this short discussion.

We were among the first to show that CO2 concentration is not rising at the fast, exponential rate that current anthropogenic emissions would lead the IPCC to expect, and that global temperature has scarcely changed since the turn of the millennium on 1 January 2001.

CO2 concentration: On emissions reduction, the international community has talked the talk, but – not least because China, India, Indonesia, Russia, Brazil, and South Africa are growing so quickly – it has not walked the walk. Accordingly, carbon emissions are at the high end of the IPCC’s projections, close to the A2 (“business as usual”) emissions scenario, which projects that atmospheric CO2 will grow at an exponential rate between now and 2100 in the absence of global cuts in emissions:

Click source to read FULL report from Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Abstract:

Through well known formulas for obtaining the mean free path length of a photon stream from the surface without colliding with a molecule of carbon dioxide is calculated. The outcome of the algorithm indicates a value of 48.02 meters. I have calculated also the time that a photon takes on leaving the atmosphere without colliding with a molecule of carbon dioxide, which is 0.411 seconds.

Introduction:

The carbon dioxide (CO2) is a very important molecule for life on Earth. Carbon dioxide is taken in from the atmosphere by photosynthetic organisms, which use the molecules of CO2 on building more complex substances where the energy transferred from the photons to the molecules of chlorophyll is stored.

The CO2 is diluted in the atmosphere in a concentration of 0.038%, and it has been proposed by the IPCC as a main driver of the climate on Earth. Contrary to what the IPCC proposes, the physics of the thermal energy transfer indicates smashingly that the CO2 is not capable of changing the temperature of the atmosphere in a significant way.

For those who beleive in anthropogenic global warming, carbon dioxide is public enemy number one. They warn that CO2 must be avoided at all costs or Earth will heat up uncontrollably causing all sorts of ecological havoc. One proposal for avoiding global warming is the sequestration of CO2 by trapping it at combustion sites or extracting it directly from the air. Supposedly, such sequestration could help avoid a large rise in atmospheric CO2 from the use of fossil fuels, avoiding the hellish fate that surely awaits mankind otherwise. Referred to as carbon capture and storage (CCS), the coal industry has seized on sequestration as a way to get greens off their backs and stay in business. However, it is not clear how effective different types of sequestration and associated leakage are in the long term, or what their consequences might be. A recent paper takes a critical look at the sequestration option.

In an article in the June 27, 2010, issue of Nature Geoscience, “Long-term effectiveness and consequences of carbon dioxide sequestration,” Gary Shaffer, from the Department of Geophysics at the University of Concepcion in Chile, has provided a sobering look at carbon sequestration in its various guises. His analysis presents the results from projections over 100,000 years for five scenarios of carbon sequestration and leakage using an Earth system model. The research is described by the author in the paper as follows:

Massive application of carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) has become a prominent proposal for mitigating global warming1. Recent discussions of CCS have been centred on its motivation, feasibility and cost compared with other mitigation strategies. Concerns have also been raised about possible consequences of storing CO2 in the ocean and of leakage of CO2 stored in geological formations. Here I compare the effectiveness as well as Earth system consequences of CO2 leakage for sequestration in the ocean and in onshore and offshore geological formations. For this purpose I make long projections with the reduced-form, Danish Center for Earth System Science (DCESS) model.

Click source to read FULL report from Doug L. Hoffman

I have had to use a photo of the Google translate page for this report from Czech to English

According to a new report in Nature Geoscience, scientists are beginning to realize that previously ignored aspects of the terrestrial biosphere can act as key regulators of atmospheric chemistry and climate. Not only that, changes in the biosphere can happen quickly—in the course of a few decades. “Although interactions between the carbon cycle and climate have been a central focus, other biogeochemical feedbacks could be as important in modulating future climate change,” states the report. Because a number of these feedbacks can have a cooling effect, the impact on global warming predictions could be earthshaking. The problem is, these feedbacks are only poorly understood and they are so interrelated that modeling them will be difficult, if not impossible.

......So, what are we to make of this new report, revealing a plethora of missing or previously ignored factors involved in climate regulation? From the levels of understanding shown in the figure above, it is clear that these factors are not well explained. When we stated in The Reslilient Earth that our knowledge of how climate works was sorely limited, the revelations made public in this report were only hinted at. Yet the Nature Geoscience report intimates that these processes and feedbacks are too important to ignore. In fact, the authors state that, “although interactions between the carbon cycle and climate have been a central focus, other biogeochemical feedbacks could be as important in modulating future climate change.”