Carbon dioxide satellite mission returns first global maps

BBC ^ | 18 December 2014 | Jonathan Amos

[moose07]

Nasa's Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO-2) has returned its first global maps of the greenhouse gas CO2.

The satellite was sent up in July to help pinpoint the key locations on the Earth's surface where carbon dioxide is being emitted and absorbed.

This should help scientists better understand how human activities are influencing the climate.

The new maps contain only a few weeks of data in October and November, but demonstrate the promise of the mission.

Clearly evident within the charts is the banding effect that describes how emitted gases are mixed by winds along latitudes rather than across them.

Also apparent are the higher concentrations over South America and southern Africa. These are likely the result of biomass burning in these regions.

It is possible to see spikes, too, on the eastern seaboard of the US and over China. These probably include the additional emissions of CO2 that come from industrialisation

Snip

Even with this snapshot, scientists can see that some of their existing models will have to be revised.

snip

The Orbiting Carbon Observatory has been spoken of as the forerunner of satellite missions that would seek to gain the information needed to patrol climate treaties, by helping to check that promises made by nations on carbon curbs were being kept.

[moose07]

I see your logic,but what would make it pile up on the coast and not just drift off across the Atlantic?

[Dad was my hero]

Yes, all their measurements are in parts per million. That is why when I start arguing with a globalwarmist I always ask them if they know what percent of the atmosphere is CO2. They usually don’t and are usually amazed when I explain that 400 ppm is 40 molecules per 100,000, 4 per 10,000 etc. Then on top of that, when it is claimed that we (humans) produce about 4% of that, so out of 400 molecules in 1,000,000, we are responsible for 16 - come on, REALLY? Then they usually give up and realize they’re being lied to.

[Tucker39]

Regardless what their CO2 maps show, it will be interesting to see how they spin the actual fact that the planet continues to COOL in direct contradiction of their “greenhouse” meme.

[Hot Tabasco]

I don't know, maybe a built up wall of air pressure between the land mass and the open water? Kinda like incoming waves that surfers ride when the water hits the reefs and swells up.......

[Fresh Wind]

Well, it’s pretty obvious from the map that the US is the biggest polluter, so it’s imperative that we throttle the US economy to save the Earth. Obola akbar! /sarc

[Gaffer]

My guess is that they are feverishly working up “trend data” (remember the Hockey Stick?) that portends horrible disaster as we speak.

[moose07]

“Obola akbar! /sarc”

Durka,Durka,Durka,Co2 jihad!

[Vinnie]

Yeah, I noticed concentrations in those high industrial areas, Nova Scotia and Greenland. /s

[norwaypinesavage]

"Considering the easterly flow of the wind, this could simply be a build up of all the Co2 that was blown across the country.... "

There's this little problem with thermodynamics.... Once a gas is dispersed into another gas, it's a little difficult to undisperse it.

[GBA]

Study Question #2: How do politicians use fear and a population’s confused and limited understanding of science and nature to motivate that population to voluntarily give up their natural resources, money and freedom?

[justlurking]

I think everyone should be careful about reading too much into this graph. While it certainly shows some interesting variations, look at the SCALE of the variation.

It's from 387 to 402.5 PPM. The high end of the scale is only 4% higher than the low end of the scale. And don't forget that is parts per million: so the difference between the high and low ends of the scale is only 15.5 parts per million.

Perhaps that is because the CO2 disperses relatively quickly. But, I'd prefer to see more data, to see if the variations remain constant.

[rlbedfor]

Wow. Who knew that co2 was so extremely rare and even the least rare areas are in the less developed areas of the world?

[rlbedfor]

If we ration carbon emission cost based on land mass and average co2 concentration, the third world owes almost all the cost. Better start saving up.

[moose07]

"I think everyone should be careful about reading too much into this graph"

You are quite correct.
But i think that most of us on this forum are aware of the amount of Salt required for climate 'science'. :)

"But, I'd prefer to see more data, to see if the variations remain constant."

The Data is from NASA ,so it may soon be on their web site. I'm not expecting to see anything other than logical seasonal changes, to be honest.

[New Perspective]

From the article.

Also apparent are the higher concentrations over South America and southern Africa. These are likely the result of biomass burning in these regions.

Notice the oh so scientific word "Likely". They love to inject unproven conjecture giving the light blanket of possibility without going out on a limb.

[New Perspective]

We also have to remember that the air is thinner along the equator due to the higher temperatures thus movement of the air is easier.

[moose07]

The Equator runs :Equador ,Kenya, Borneo.

The Co2 concentrations are not equally split above and below the line.

Sorry ,cannot make that idea stick.

[IronJack]

Lol! Turns out the highest concentrations are coming from the Amazon Basin in Brazil!

I knew my “Pave the Rainforests” campaign was on the right track.

[moose07]

“Save paradise, put up a parking lot.”

[IronJack]

Joni Mitchell was a visionary!