#AGU14 NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory shows surprising CO2 emissions in Southern Hemisphere

Wattsupwiththat.com ^ | December 20, 2014 | Anthony Watts

[naturalman1975]

Carbon dioxide concentrations are highest above northern Australia

I may just misunderstand the map, but I can't see this...

[jsanders2001]

Sure that screenshot doesn’t just correspond with higher temperatures because the heaviest co concentrations seem to be near the equator...

[UCANSEE2]

It would seem that despite the GW alarmist claims, it is not the US that is putting high levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

fyi

[bluejean]

“Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has no distinguishing features to show what its source was.”

OMG!! What an agenda killer statement! They always swear to God/gods/Gaia/satan that it’s all manmade and they need trillions of dollars from puking disgusting epic fail mankind to “fix” it!

Morons. Humans are definitely in epic fail mode, but it’s not because of naturally occurring gases on the planet.

[tcrlaf]

With the exception of China, all of those areas seem to be either jungle, or Volcanic.

Imagine THAT ONE, eh??

This does not fit the pre-approved liberal echowhacko narrative!

[Kirkwood]

You can’t see it? It is right there over Indonesia.

[__rvx86]

At least it is now clear as day that we Americans are NOT the cause for “global warming”

[naturalman1975]

Which is not ‘over northern Australia’. It’s over Indonesia.

I don’t understand.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Must be from wood burning stoves there,

[bigbob]

Lookit all that CO2 over the Amazon Rainforest...welp, those darn trees are just gonna have to go! Tree-made Grobull Warming!

[dalereed]

It's the penguins!!! Kill them all to save the earth!!!

[clearcarbon]

"Over the next few months, the team will refine the OCO-2 data"

...so they will more closely satisfy obama administration requirements.

[naturalman1975]

I'm looking at the maps on this page:

Especially to this one:

which is said to show Net Primary Production from 1951-2001.

As I understand it, NPP shows where most carbon dioxide is turned by photoynthesis into chemical energy.

To my completely layman eyes, it looks like the areas that the map you've shared here, matches this NPP map pretty well.

And that to me would seem to suggest a mechanism by which CO2 concentrates in the areas of the world where it does the most good.

I'm not an expert of any sort on this. I just notice this and wonder what is going on. I may be completely misunderstanding both maps.

[GeronL]

rainforests cause global warming

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

From the comments:

**************************************************EXCERPT*************************************

• Ferdinand Engelbeen says:
  December 21, 2014 at 1:46 am

  Not (yet) for today’s satellite, but if the data are getting more and more accurate and the satellite has features to concentrate on “hot spots” like populated areas or forests, the possibilities of exact source/sink determination are increasing.

  About determination of the global source, here two graphs that show the influence of vegetation and humans:

  

  This shows the opposite δ13C and CO2 rate of changes, slightly after the temperature variations: CO2/δ13C follow temperature changes as can be seen for the 1998 El Niño in opposite ways. That shows that the (tropical) forests are the main cause of both changes. If the extra CO2 increase was from the oceans, the CO2 and δ13C changes would be in the same direction, as the δ13C level from oceanic CO2 is higher than of the atmosphere.
  Over longer term, humans are the cause of the δ13C decline, as the contribution from the biosphere and oceans is positive in δ13C:

  

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Preceding comments to what I poated im #17:

***********************************EXCERPT**************************************

Tom J says:

December 20, 2014 at 12:55 pm

The revenue generating mystery novel needs a mysterious, and changing villain if the public is to be constantly coaxed into dispensing hard earned money.

Reply

• Ferdinand Engelbeen says:
  December 20, 2014 at 4:21 pm

  Tom, the satellite doesn’t measure isotopes, it only measures total CO2. But if you look at the isotopes (taken at many places on earth), there is a firm decline in “heavy” 13CO2. That has two main possible sources: new biological carbon and fossil biological carbon (and maybe some a-biological too). But the biosphere as a whole is a net sink for CO2 (~1 GtC/year), thus not the cause of the 13C decline…

  The decline of 13C exactly follows human emissions, be it at about 1/3rd of the theoretical decline, if it all remained in the atmosphere. As there is a lot of exchange with other reservoirs, mainly the deep oceans, a large part of the low-13CO2 from burning fossil fuels is replaced by high-13CO2 from the oceans.

  Drought (in the tropics) also shows up both in the CO2 rate of change as in the 13C rate of change: while the rate of change increases during an El Niño, the 13C rate of change drops and vv., but that are temporarily wiggles which last maximum 2-3 years. Anyway, those wiggles are clearly caused by vegetation (decay goes on while growth is suppressed), but on longer term, vegetation is a net sink for CO2 and preferably 12CO2, leaving relative more 13CO2 in the atmosphere…

  Reply
  • Tom Moran says:
    December 20, 2014 at 6:29 pm

    “Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has no distinguishing features to show what its source was.”
    So then the quote from the post is not factual? We can measure atmospheric CO2 and precisely determine its source?

[spokeshave]

With the exception of China, all of those areas seem to be either jungle, or Volcanic.

Make the ...Used to be jungle....

The high CO2 in southern hemisphere and around Indonesia is because of burning off jungle to plant palm oil trees.....so the greenies can use non crude oil derivtives inb their cars.

Above shows deforestation regions.

Above shows typical palm oil plantation on former jungle.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Now that is super interesting!