Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Chaguito
It is true that the C13/C12 ratio has dropped since around 1850 or so and is used as "proof" of manmade CO2, e.g. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/how-do-we-know-that-recent-cosub2sub-increases-are-due-to-human-activities-updated/ whereas the C14/C12 ratio is affected by the sun http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2010/12/carbon-isotope-ratios-and-climate.html

My best guess is that some of each ratio change (13/12 and 14/12) is natural and some is from fossil fuel burning. In the case of 14/12, one natural factor is high solar activity in the late 20th century. But most of the rise is fossil fuels. For 13/12, some of the ratio change is natural because some natural sources mimic the fossil fuel ratio (e.g. deep ocean). Dr Spencer also has some thoughts on 13/12 http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/01/28/spencer-pt2-more-co2-peculiarities-the-c13c12-isotope-ratio/ answered by Englebeen who says that vegetation and fossil fuels show a similar ratio (due to growing plants preference for C12).

37 posted on 12/06/2010 3:58:29 AM PST by palmer (Cooperating with Obama = helping him extend the depression and implement socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: palmer

Thanks for the info. I knew that the C14/C12 ratio had dropped. The change in C13/C12 ratio I find a bit difficult to swallow as anthropogenic. But I do think that the ratios are far more accessible than some of the other climate data that is presented as fact.


38 posted on 12/06/2010 9:14:37 AM PST by Chaguito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson