Exploring Hydrocarbon Depletion
Cid_Yama wrote:What is the sock puppet on about? Is it meant to be sarcasm that's not translating?
Midnight Oil wrote:Yep, just IGNORE my previous post before that one, you got better things to do like post digits.
Carbon dioxide levels rose at record pace for 2nd straight year
Squilliam wrote:The reason for the jump is El-Nino. Although it does beg the question about how long the various sinks are going to keep sucking down the CO2 at the current rate. Even as emissions stabilize (not increase) the amount of CO2 increase is continuing to increase. Eventually feedbacks and saturation of the current sinks will have to cause the CO2 increase to accelerate.
It is still hard to project the rate of change, due to the extremely fast change of CO2 levels in modern times. Dr. James Hansen, a leading climate expert points out in his book “Storms of My Grandchildren” that at the current rate CO2 will increase one hundred ppm in approximately 40 years. During past periods of abrupt change — the most recent one occurring approximately 50 million years ago — it took roughly a million years for CO2 to change by one hundred ppm. Thus it is now changing about 25,000 times faster than in known geologic history.
the present annual delta from 2016 to 2017 for the first three months is 2.8 ppm CO2 increase — which is below the 3 ppm annual increase rates from 2015 to 2016. But it is still significantly higher than the past average range of around 2.2 ppm per year
dohboi wrote:So I guess...since we have determined that a few hundredths of a ppm are not significant...perhaps we should count the figure 409.95 as statistically indistinguishable from 410 and call it a day?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests