|
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer, James C. Zachos Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3°C for doubled CO2, including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, is ~6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and icefree Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, large scale glaciation occurring when CO2 fell to 425±75 ppm, a level that will be exceeded within decades, barring prompt policy changes. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. Please see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1126 For supporting materal see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1135 For an article in the popular press, please see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...arbonemissions |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
On Apr 15, 9:57 am, Roger Coppock wrote:
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim? James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer, James C. Zachos Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3°C for doubled CO2, including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, is ~6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and icefree Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, large scale glaciation occurring when CO2 fell to 425±75 ppm, a level that will be exceeded within decades, barring prompt policy changes. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. Please see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1126 For supporting materal see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1135 For an article in the popular press, please see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...techange.carbo... But the Earth is showing signs of Cooling whilst Fossil CO2 is going through the roof . |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
On Apr 15, 10:57*am, Roger Coppock wrote:
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim? James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer, James C. Zachos Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3°C for doubled CO2, including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, is ~6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and icefree Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, large scale glaciation occurring when CO2 fell to 425±75 ppm, a level that will be exceeded within decades, barring prompt policy changes. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. Please see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1126 For supporting materal see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1135 For an article in the popular press, please see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...techange.carbo... 500 to 2000 seems pretty OK since this is what it has been since the Jurassic (when modern animals and plants evolved) |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
On Apr 15, 8:55*pm, matt_sykes wrote:
On Apr 15, 10:57*am, Roger Coppock wrote: Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim? James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer, James C. Zachos Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3°C for doubled CO2, including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, is ~6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and icefree Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, large scale glaciation occurring when CO2 fell to 425±75 ppm, a level that will be exceeded within decades, barring prompt policy changes. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. Please see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1126 For supporting materal see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1135 For an article in the popular press, please see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...techange.carbo... 500 to 2000 seems pretty OK since this is what it has been since the Jurassic *(when modern animals and plants evolved)- Nah ah ... Toxic levels of carbon dioxide: According to occupational exposure and controlled atmosphere research into CO2 toxicology, CO2 is hazardous via direct toxicity at levels above 5%, concentrations not encountered in nature [except perhaps at or near an active volcano or at water- logged soils]. At these high levels there is risk of death from carbon dioxide poisoning. At lower levels there may health effects and there certainly are complaints of exposure at lower levels. In the preceding section of this article, at CO2 POISONING SYMPTOMS we discussed symptoms of carbon dioxide exposure. On specific individuals, the effects of exposure to elevated levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) vary by individual and with exposure level, and exposure duration, ranging from drowsiness (perhaps at levels over 1000 ppm continuous exposure) to the toxic effects listed just above. ... The U.S. EPA CO2 exposure limits: The U.S. EPA recommends a maximum concentration of Carbon dioxide CO2 of 1000 ppm (0.1%) for continuous exposure. ASHRAE standard 62-1989 recommends an indoor air ventilation standard of 20 cfm per person of outdoor air or a CO2 level which is below 1000ppm. http://www.inspect-ny.com/hazmat/CO2gashaz.htm |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
On Apr 15, 2:44*pm, Fran wrote:
On Apr 15, 8:55*pm, matt_sykes wrote: On Apr 15, 10:57*am, Roger Coppock wrote: Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim? James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer, James C. Zachos Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3°C for doubled CO2, including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, is ~6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and icefree Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, large scale glaciation occurring when CO2 fell to 425±75 ppm, a level that will be exceeded within decades, barring prompt policy changes. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. Please see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1126 For supporting materal see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1135 For an article in the popular press, please see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...techange.carbo.... 500 to 2000 seems pretty OK since this is what it has been since the Jurassic *(when modern animals and plants evolved)- Nah ah ... Toxic levels of carbon dioxide: According to occupational exposure and controlled atmosphere research into CO2 toxicology, CO2 is hazardous via direct toxicity at levels above 5%, concentrations not encountered in nature [except perhaps at or near an active volcano or at water- logged soils]. At these high levels there is risk of death from carbon dioxide poisoning. At lower levels there may health effects and there certainly are complaints of exposure at lower levels. In the preceding section of this article, at CO2 POISONING SYMPTOMS we discussed symptoms of carbon dioxide exposure. On specific individuals, the effects of exposure to elevated levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) vary by individual and with exposure level, and exposure duration, ranging from drowsiness (perhaps at levels over 1000 ppm continuous exposure) to the toxic effects listed just above. ... The U.S. EPA CO2 exposure limits: The U.S. EPA recommends a maximum concentration of Carbon dioxide CO2 of 1000 ppm (0.1%) for continuous exposure. ASHRAE standard 62-1989 recommends an indoor air ventilation standard of 20 cfm per person of outdoor air or a CO2 level which is below 1000ppm. http://www.inspect-ny.com/hazmat/CO2gashaz.htm- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Agricultural workers in greenhouses work with CO2 generally at 5000 ppm as a maximum recomended level so your 1000 is from some other source, perhaps for ill or old people in hospital? Anyway, it is unlikely we will ever get to 1000 since plant growth will explode. |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
chemist wrote:
On Apr 15, 9:57 am, Roger Coppock wrote: Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim? James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer, James C. Zachos Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3°C for doubled CO2, including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, is ~6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and icefree Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, large scale glaciation occurring when CO2 fell to 425±75 ppm, a level that will be exceeded within decades, barring prompt policy changes. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. Please see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1126 For supporting materal see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1135 For an article in the popular press, please see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...techange.carbo... But the Earth is showing signs of Cooling whilst Fossil CO2 is going through the roof . Welcome to La Nina, lying idiot. |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
matt_sykes wrote:
On Apr 15, 2:44 pm, Fran wrote: On Apr 15, 8:55 pm, matt_sykes wrote: On Apr 15, 10:57 am, Roger Coppock wrote: Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim? James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer, James C. Zachos Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3°C for doubled CO2, including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, is ~6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and icefree Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, large scale glaciation occurring when CO2 fell to 425±75 ppm, a level that will be exceeded within decades, barring prompt policy changes. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. Please see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1126 For supporting materal see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1135 For an article in the popular press, please see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...techange.carbo... 500 to 2000 seems pretty OK since this is what it has been since the Jurassic (when modern animals and plants evolved)- Nah ah ... Toxic levels of carbon dioxide: According to occupational exposure and controlled atmosphere research into CO2 toxicology, CO2 is hazardous via direct toxicity at levels above 5%, concentrations not encountered in nature [except perhaps at or near an active volcano or at water- logged soils]. At these high levels there is risk of death from carbon dioxide poisoning. At lower levels there may health effects and there certainly are complaints of exposure at lower levels. In the preceding section of this article, at CO2 POISONING SYMPTOMS we discussed symptoms of carbon dioxide exposure. On specific individuals, the effects of exposure to elevated levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) vary by individual and with exposure level, and exposure duration, ranging from drowsiness (perhaps at levels over 1000 ppm continuous exposure) to the toxic effects listed just above. ... The U.S. EPA CO2 exposure limits: The U.S. EPA recommends a maximum concentration of Carbon dioxide CO2 of 1000 ppm (0.1%) for continuous exposure. ASHRAE standard 62-1989 recommends an indoor air ventilation standard of 20 cfm per person of outdoor air or a CO2 level which is below 1000ppm. http://www.inspect-ny.com/hazmat/CO2gashaz.htm- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Agricultural workers in greenhouses work with CO2 generally at 5000 ppm as a maximum recomended level ..for an 8 hour day. so your 1000 is from some other source, perhaps for ill or old people in hospital? Nope, see 'continuous exposure'. Anyway, it is unlikely we will ever get to 1000 since plant growth will explode. Which doesn't change the fact that once again, Matt Sykes has been caught lying outright. |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
On Apr 15, 1:57*am, Roger Coppock wrote:
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim? James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer, James C. Zachos Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3°C for doubled CO2, Ludicrous speculation. No such data exists. These AGW whackjobs can't distintinguish between data and their overactive imaginations. including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, is ~6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and icefree Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, Plainly false. large scale glaciation occurring when CO2 fell to 425±75 ppm, a level that will be exceeded within decades, barring prompt policy changes. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. It's unfortunate you cannot provide us links to your imagination. Please see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1126 For supporting materal see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1135 For an article in the popular press, please see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...techange.carbo... |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
On Apr 15, 7:00*am, matt_sykes wrote:
[ . . . ][ Agricultural workers in greenhouses work with CO2 generally at 5000 ppm as a maximum recomended level so your 1000 is from some other source, perhaps for ill or old people in hospital? In San Diego two greenhouse workers died from CO2. Port workers packing stuff in dry ice also died. Now, CalOSHA keeps a close watch on CO2 concentrations at workplaces. Anyway, it is unlikely we will ever get to 1000 since plant growth will explode. How tragic! You actually expect a miracle that will save us from our greenhouse gas emissions. |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
On Apr 15, 7:45*am, wrote:
On Apr 15, 1:57*am, Roger Coppock wrote: Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim? James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer, James C. Zachos Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3°C for doubled CO2, Ludicrous speculation. *No such data exists. You should read before you comment. The data exist. Please see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1126 For supporting materal see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1135 |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
Roger Coppock wrote:
On Apr 15, 7:00 am, matt_sykes wrote: [ . . . ][ Agricultural workers in greenhouses work with CO2 generally at 5000 ppm as a maximum recomended level so your 1000 is from some other source, perhaps for ill or old people in hospital? In San Diego two greenhouse workers died from CO2. Port workers packing stuff in dry ice also died. Now, CalOSHA keeps a close watch on CO2 concentrations at workplaces. Anyway, it is unlikely we will ever get to 1000 since plant growth will explode. How tragic! You actually expect a miracle that will save us from our greenhouse gas emissions. Simple logic say that if people die from Co2 that we will se a major die off of people with emphazima and asthma.... The Canary in the cave thing. As more die then production of co2 will drop and the strong will survive, that is your Darwinism. |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
"Poetic Justice" wrote in message ... Roger Coppock wrote: On Apr 15, 7:00 am, matt_sykes wrote: [ . . . ][ Agricultural workers in greenhouses work with CO2 generally at 5000 ppm as a maximum recomended level so your 1000 is from some other source, perhaps for ill or old people in hospital? In San Diego two greenhouse workers died from CO2. Port workers packing stuff in dry ice also died. Now, CalOSHA keeps a close watch on CO2 concentrations at workplaces. Anyway, it is unlikely we will ever get to 1000 since plant growth will explode. How tragic! You actually expect a miracle that will save us from our greenhouse gas emissions. Simple logic say that if people die from Co2 that we will se a major die off of people with emphazima and asthma.... The Canary in the cave thing. As more die then production of co2 will drop ROFLMAO |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
On Apr 16, 12:00 am, matt_sykes wrote:
On Apr 15, 2:44 pm, Fran wrote: On Apr 15, 8:55 pm, matt_sykes wrote: On Apr 15, 10:57 am, Roger Coppock wrote: Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim? James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer, James C. Zachos Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3°C for doubled CO2, including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, is ~6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and icefree Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, large scale glaciation occurring when CO2 fell to 425±75 ppm, a level that will be exceeded within decades, barring prompt policy changes. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. Please see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1126 For supporting materal see: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0804.1135 For an article in the popular press, please see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...techange.carbo.... 500 to 2000 seems pretty OK since this is what it has been since the Jurassic (when modern animals and plants evolved)- Nah ah ... Toxic levels of carbon dioxide: According to occupational exposure and controlled atmosphere research into CO2 toxicology, CO2 is hazardous via direct toxicity at levels above 5%, concentrations not encountered in nature [except perhaps at or near an active volcano or at water- logged soils]. At these high levels there is risk of death from carbon dioxide poisoning. At lower levels there may health effects and there certainly are complaints of exposure at lower levels. In the preceding section of this article, at CO2 POISONING SYMPTOMS we discussed symptoms of carbon dioxide exposure. On specific individuals, the effects of exposure to elevated levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) vary by individual and with exposure level, and exposure duration, ranging from drowsiness (perhaps at levels over 1000 ppm continuous exposure) to the toxic effects listed just above. ... The U.S. EPA CO2 exposure limits: The U.S. EPA recommends a maximum concentration of Carbon dioxide CO2 of 1000 ppm (0.1%) for continuous exposure. ASHRAE standard 62-1989 recommends an indoor air ventilation standard of 20 cfm per person of outdoor air or a CO2 level which is below 1000ppm. http://www.inspect-ny.com/hazmat/CO2gashaz.htm-Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Agricultural workers in greenhouses work with CO2 generally at 5000 ppm as a maximum recomended level so your 1000 is from some other source, perhaps for ill or old people in hospital? No ... check the links. Here's something else: ||| In 1986, a tremendous explosion of CO2 from the lake Nyos, West of Cameroon, killed more than 1700 people and livestock up to 25 km away. The dissolved CO2 is seeping from springs beneath the lake and is trapped in deep water by the high hydrostatic pressure. http://pagesperso-orange.fr/mhalb/nyos/nyos.htm http://pagesperso-orange.fr/mhalb/ny...exdisaster.htm THE AUGUST 12 EXPULSION OF DEADLY CO2 The CO2-rich cloud was expelled rapidly from the southern floor of Lake Nyos. It rose as a jet with a speed of about 100 km per hour. The cloud quickly enveloped houses within the crater that were 120 meters above the shoreline of the lake. Because CO2 is about 1.5 times the density of air, the gaseous mass hugged the ground surface and descended down valleys along the north side of the crater. The deadly cloud was about 50 meters thick and it advanced downslope at a rate of 20 to 50 km per hour. This deadly mist persisted in a concentrated form over a distance of 23 km, bringing sudden death to the villages of Nyos, Kam, Cha, and Subum http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/how_volc...work/Nyos.html Now plainly, the concentrations here were far higher than what we are talking about, but it underlines the fact that CO2 like most things we humans need is needed in only modest amounts. Anyway, it is unlikely we will ever get to 1000 since plant growth will explode You're probably right because 'we' (i.e you and I and the vast majority of those able to read this right now) won't be alive when CO2 reaches 1000 PPM, which probably won't occur this side of 2096. At least, one would hope so. Nevertheless, it's far from impossible. And as I said, the plant growth that might result wouldn't necessarily be of great use to us, except perhaps as a carbon sink. 1000 PPM approximates the environment of a seriously stuffy room. People get drowsy and inattentive. If you want the people of the future to live in a world like that and have no place to escape to fresh air along with persistent stfling heat and humidity then you plainly have a different vision of human wellbeing than I do. Fran |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
"chemist" wrote But the Earth is showing signs of Cooling whilst Fossil CO2 is going through the roof . And the Non-Chemist once again shows himself to be a liar. 2007 Tied for Earth's Second Warmest Year Andrea Thompson LiveScience Staff Writer January 16, 2008 The year 2007 has tied 1998 for the Earth's second warmest this century, NASA scientists announced today. Climatologists at the agency's Goddard Institute for Space Sciences (GISS) in New York used temperature data from weather stations on land, satellite measurements of sea ice temperature since 1982 and data from ships for earlier years to construct a record of global average temperatures going back for over a century. The GISS analysis has 1934, 1998 and 2005 tied as the warmest years in the United States (with 2005 being the warmest globally). The eight warmest years globally in the past century have all occurred since 1998, and the 14 warmest years have all occurred since 1990. The greatest observed warming in 2007 occurred in the Arctic, which experienced a record sea ice melt this summer, opening up the fabled Northwest Passage for the first time. "As we predicted last year, 2007 was warmer than 2006, continuing the strong warming trend of the past 30 years that has been confidently attributed to the effect of increasing human-made greenhouse gases," said NASA GISS Director James E. Hansen. A minor flaw in the GISS record discovered last year did not affect this analysis, the scientists noted. Hansen says that warming can be expected to continue, with another record warm year coming soon, though it is unlikely to be 2008. "Barring a large volcanic eruption, a record global temperature clearly exceeding that of 2005 can be expected within the next few years, at the time of the next El Nino , because of the background warming trend attributable to continuing increases of greenhouse gases," Hansen said. El Nino tends to have a warming effect on temperatures in many areas, while the volcanic ash that an eruption spews into the air has a cooling effect. While most scientists agree the planet is warming, the trend does not proceed constantly upward year-by-year. Other factors cause hikes and dips in the generally trajectory of the global temperature chart, which has been mostly trending upward since the beginning of the 20th century. |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
"matt_sykes" wrote Anyway, it is unlikely we will ever get to 1000 since plant growth will explode. Plant response to CO2 is sublinear. Question: What evidence do you have of an ever increasing superlinear response (explosion). Answer: No evidence at all. Answer: No theory at all. And that makes you a Lying... MMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN |
Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3°C for doubled CO2, wrote Ludicrous speculation. No such data exists. Actually it's existed for the last 100 years ever since it was first computed by Svante Arrhenius... And that makes you a..... MMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNN |
Textbook Strawman: Example --- Climate Change mitigation policies
"Fran" wrote in message ... On Apr 25, 10:22 am, Addinall wrote: On Apr 24, 11:30 am, Fran wrote: On Apr 24, 7:02 am, "V-for-Vendicar" wrote: "addinall" wrote Well given the 16 times a minute you breath, you exhale a mixture of gasses that contains about 5%CO2. 7% down in our lungs. Stop breathing Fran. You're ****ing up the planet. Mouth breathers like Addinall might think that breathing is the source of the earth'sCO2. But in fact exhailedCO2isCO2that was recently acquired by the uptake ofCO2from the atmosphere by plants. Hence breathing is part of a cycle ofCO2exchange between the biosphere and the atmosphere. AtmosphericCO2levels are increasing by about 5 billion tonnes per year as a result of the burning of huge quantities of coal and oil. The example from Mr Addinall above is a textbook 'strawman' strategy. A strawman strategy is one in which some tries to 'win' and argument by redefining the terms of the argument to create an absurdity or contradiction. Just as a caricature of a public figure involves accentuating one of his most visible attributes, typically, the user of the strawman strategy makes a caricature of the opponent's position by distorting the relationships between components, exaggerating or changing the significance of one of the elements. Now, that was pure straw. Comrade Fran, when faced with facts, normally hides under a number of arguments by fallacy; and this is just another attempt at hiding the fact that she argues from a knowledge base less than appropriate for the discussions she joins. Or so you like to claim. You shouldn't be using these strawman arguments Comrade Flan. They don't get too far with me I can tell you. |
Textbook Strawman: Example --- Climate Change mitigation policies
On Apr 25, 4:16*pm, "Green Lantern" wrote:
"Fran" wrote in message ... On Apr 25, 10:22 am, Addinall wrote: On Apr 24, 11:30 am, Fran wrote: On Apr 24, 7:02 am, "V-for-Vendicar" wrote: "addinall" wrote Well given the 16 times a minute you breath, you exhale a mixture of gasses that contains about 5%CO2. 7% down in our lungs. Stop breathing Fran. You're ****ing up the planet. Mouth breathers like Addinall might think that breathing is the source of the earth'sCO2. But in fact exhailedCO2isCO2that was recently acquired by the uptake ofCO2from the atmosphere by plants. Hence breathing is part of a cycle ofCO2exchange between the biosphere and the atmosphere. AtmosphericCO2levels are increasing by about 5 billion tonnes per year as a result of the burning of huge quantities of coal and oil. The example from Mr Addinall above is a textbook 'strawman' strategy. A strawman strategy is one in which some tries to 'win' and argument by redefining the terms of the argument to create an absurdity or contradiction. Just as a caricature of a public figure involves accentuating one of his most visible attributes, typically, the user of the strawman strategy makes a caricature of the opponent's position by distorting the relationships between components, exaggerating or changing the significance of one of the elements. Now, that was pure straw. Comrade Fran, when faced with facts, normally hides under a number of arguments by fallacy; and this is just another attempt at hiding the fact that she argues from a knowledge base less than appropriate for the discussions she joins. Or so you like to claim. You shouldn't be using these strawman arguments Comrade Fran. And this is an example of 'begging the question' which is something you're very fond of. They don't get too far with me I can tell you Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Fran |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 12:42 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 WeatherBanter.co.uk