High carbon dioxide levels set a record

SFGate.com ^ | 5/1/14 | David Perlman

[rey]

“Ban all carbonated drinks. They’re totally unnecessary.”

YES! Am I the only one who notices that the bump in carbon output coincides with the introduction of New Coke? It’s the real thing.

[Night Hides Not]

Saturated: containing the maximum amount of solute capable of being dissolved under given conditions.

400 parts per million? That's 0.04%...I wouldn't consider that as "saturated."

[stubernx98]

An Icelandic Volcano that erupted recently, produced more CO2 in four days than all the supposed reductions by man in CO2 for the last 40 years.
CO2 is a minor green house gas. 05% as compared wth H2O. Also it is a lagging indicator of warming, not leading.

[DoughtyOne]

Noticed your stats here.  Thought it might be interesting to look at some figures that would touch on things that might impact these levels of carbon dioxide.  

(I will use the period of 1960 to 2010.  The chart seems to go though April 2014, but the data I found didn't get quite that speicific.)

In a way, and I'm not faulting you here, the presentation of that stat graph is misleading.  It shows a rapid rise, but it doesn't show the whole data stack.  The growth is 29% over the 50 years.  If we saw the graph presented zero to 310 all the way up to 401, it would be more evident that this is not as massive an increase as one might think, just looking at the graph showing 310 to 401.

Lets look at the figures for the population increase during that period.  As a nation we went from 179.323 million to 308.745 million.  That's an increase of 72%.  LINK

Let's look at the figures for light automobiles short wheelbase in the U. S.  As a nation we went from 74.432 million to 250.070 million.  That's an increase of 200.36%.  LINK

Let's look at the figures for light duty vehicles, long wheelbase in the U. S.  As a nation we went from 14.211 million to 41.328 million. That's an increase of 191.0%.  (1970 to 2010 figures only / with the other ten years figured in this could have been pretty impressive.  LINK

What we see are figures depicting impressive growth in human civilization, and also the number one culprit associated with the carbon dioxide.  The human populace increase alone, should help to raise carbon dioxide levels alone by at least 72%.  Automobiles should have increased their contribution to it by 200.36%.  What appears to be light trucks, should have increased it by 191.0%.  I realize the vehicles were modified to reduce emissions.  It would still seem that their impact would have been massive looking at the increase in numbers.

If these things are the major influences on carbon dioxide levels they are continually non-stop criticized for being, then the carbon dioxide levels should have gone up by at least 72%, and as much as close to 200%.

Instead we see a 29% increase.

At 29%, what is the damage?  Is there any?  Does this mean that the earth is destined to become a boiling cauldren unable to sustain life?

I'm not convinced of that.  I am not convinced that citilzation is on the brink of anything, except being de-mobalized and or de-industrialized by poeple who think the sky is falling, and are willing to demagogue the issue any way possible to achieve their goals.

[Raycpa]

Why is 400 a magic number?

[molson209]

Very Very good for the Plants

[HMS Surprise]

Pre-Cambrian is the place to be. Farm livin’ that’s the life for me. Land stretchin’ out so far and wide. Keep Manhattan and give me that countryside...

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

Wonder what the CO2 level was back when the oxygen content of the atmosphere was 30%. I bet there were some good wildfires back then!

[central_va]

dihydrogen monoxide has killed more humans than CO₂ has by far.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"The precise average for the entire month was 401.25 parts per million as of Tuesday,"

I've got a big, beautiful CO² producing compost pile, and I intend to keep revving it up until we hit 1500 - 1800 ppm.

My ideal, and I'm fighting for it!

I'm talking about green -- REAL GREEN.

[RightGeek]

I think I'll just have a snooze.

[Bernard Marx]

This is such B.S.! I've done enough research on this topic to know there's absolutely no relationship between high atmospheric CO2 levels and warming. In fact paleo-climate experts seem in agreement that elevated CO2 levels occur on average about 800 years *after* warming spikes.

There have been many periods in Earth's history when atmospheric CO2 levels were much higher than today's, while global climate was cooler. And there are many statements from warming alarmists like the following:

"No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits.... Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world."

Christine Stewart, former Minister of the Environment of Canada, quote from the Calgary Herald, 1999

[Raycpa]

Seeing the graph of the Keeling Curve for my first time I am initially impressed. Looking at it a bit longer I am perplexed. I don’t recall seeing any data measuring a property of our world look so orderly. I would expect some fluctuation in the line over the 50 year period. We have weather cycles like el-nino, we have volcanoes, we have different wind patterns, we have accelerated growth of industry and population none of which seem to change the pattern.

In short, the graph doesn’t pass the smell test.

[MrB]

I think the “magic number” is actually BELOW the present 400.

There’s a saturation point above which further increase in the levels of CO2 contribute no more to the greenhouse effect.

[Pikachu_Dad]

Saturated? Stupid chemist does not know the meaning of the word!

[Pikachu_Dad]

Uh, ‘never seen in history’?

[Raycpa]

I think the saturation point is for grant money. Below 400 the saturation point has been reached for additional funds. Above 400 and the grant writers can make fresh appeals.

[The Great RJ]

401.25 parts per million

If the global climate is so fragile that a variation of only a few parts per million of CO2 or other green house gasses triggers a tipping point, a single large volcano eruption would be enough to trigger an ice age or similar climate catastrophe wiping out all life on earth eons ago.

[MaxMax]

I understand that Common Core math will allow numbers to be rounded off.
For instance from 214.090055% to an even 400%, if 400% is the goal.

[jwalsh07]

400 isn’t a magic number. The magic number is 150ppm. Below that level plants will die off and we will truly be screwed.