Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Brad from Tennessee; wardaddy; Joe Brower; Cannoneer No. 4; Criminal Number 18F; ...
I'd like to see a rebirth of the Know Nothing Party.

It's already here.


Global Cooling and the Madness of Davos

So we asked the US Department of Energy. They tell us that all of humanity contributes 3% of the worlds C02. They also say that C02 is responsible for only 9% of the greenhouse gases. So multiply 3% of 9% and you get 1/370, or in other words all of humanity’s CO2 ‘footprint’ constitutes about 1/370th of the earths greenhouse gases. Humans are relatively insignificant, and real climate scientists know this but it does not pay to say so.

Interestingly, when I now clicked on that title at Google News on OpEdNews, it now defaults to OpEdNews homepage, a leftwing website. I originally found the article by searching for "global cooling" on Google News. So I did a title search on the web and found it here:

Global Cooling and the Madness of Davos

I couldn't verify that human activity accounts for just three percent of the worlds C02. Here's a DOE source that saya it's a wopping fourteen percent of the increase in CO2. /s

Q. What percentage of the CO2 in the atmosphere has been produced by human beings through the burning of fossil fuels?

Anthropogenic CO2 comes from fossil fuel combustion, changes in land use (e.g., forest clearing), and cement manufacture. Houghton and Hackler have estimated land-use changes from 1850-2000, so it is convenient to use 1850 as our starting point for the following discussion. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations had not changed appreciably over the preceding 850 years (IPCC; The Scientific Basis) so it may be safely assumed that they would not have changed appreciably in the 150 years from 1850 to 2000 in the absence of human intervention.

In the following calculations, we will express atmospheric concentrations of CO2 in units of parts per million by volume (ppmv). Each ppmv represents 2.13 X1015 grams, or 2.13 petagrams of carbon (PgC) in the atmosphere. According to Houghton and Hackler, land-use changes from 1850-2000 resulted in a net transfer of 154 PgC to the atmosphere. During that same period, 282 PgC were released by combustion of fossil fuels, and 5.5 additional PgC were released to the atmosphere from cement manufacture. This adds up to 154 + 282 + 5.5 = 441.5 PgC, of which 282/444.1 = 64% is due to fossil-fuel combustion.

Atmospheric CO2 concentrations rose from 288 ppmv in 1850 to 369.5 ppmv in 2000, for an increase of 81.5 ppmv, or 174 PgC. In other words, about 40% (174/441.5) of the additional carbon has remained in the atmosphere, while the remaining 60% has been transferred to the oceans and terrestrial biosphere.

The 369.5 ppmv of carbon in the atmosphere, in the form of CO2, translates into 787 PgC, of which 174 PgC has been added since 1850. From the second paragraph above, we see that 64% of that 174 PgC, or 111 PgC, can be attributed to fossil-fuel combustion. This represents about 14% (111/787) of the carbon in the atmosphere in the form of CO2.

I couldn't follow that explanation, but the point is the world is a huge carbon sink.

P.S. Parts per million can be expressed as either units of volume or mass.

Whatever Happened to Global Warming?

Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.

19 posted on 02/09/2009 12:32:28 PM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: All

Now I get what they wrote. Divide the atmosphere into one million units of volume. Each unit of volume has a mass of 2.13 petagrams of carbon (PgC) in the atmosphere.


20 posted on 02/09/2009 12:56:06 PM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

I read somewhere that termites are the main living CO2 producers.

Water vapor is such a big factor it seems to me the affect of CO2 would be eclipsed. But I’m not a scientist.

Thanks for the info.


21 posted on 02/09/2009 1:55:51 PM PST by Brad from Tennessee ("A politician can't give you anything he hasn't first stolen from you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

Thanks for the ping!


22 posted on 02/10/2009 7:01:16 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem
I couldn't follow that explanation, but the point is the world is a huge carbon sink.

Yep, it is. If it wasn't for human activities, CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere would probably be decreasing at a very slow rate. (I.e, according to the current estimates, the natural fluxes are nearly in balance. I'll provide a model diagram below; you can find several by Googling "global carbon cycle". The numbers on the arrows may vary slightly in different model presentations.) It's half-size below; click it for full-size.


23 posted on 02/10/2009 9:08:22 PM PST by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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