Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 01/05/2010 2:43:42 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Science Daily reported on a new study from the University of Bristol released over the holidays that deserves to get wider attention. In contrast to claims from anthropogenic global-warming activists, this new analysis refutes one of the key principles of carbon-driven warming:
Most of the carbon dioxide emitted by human activity does not remain in the atmosphere, but is instead absorbed by the oceans and terrestrial ecosystems. In fact, only about 45 percent of emitted carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere. …
To assess whether the airborne fraction is indeed increasing, Wolfgang Knorr of the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Bristol reanalyzed available atmospheric carbon dioxide and emissions data since 1850 and considers the uncertainties in the data.
In contradiction to some recent studies, he finds that the airborne fraction of carbon dioxide has not increased either during the past 150 years or during the most recent five decades.
The thumbnail argument for AGW is this: the CO2 emitted by industrialization over the last 150 years has accumulated in the atmosphere, along with other gases such as methane, warming the globe more rapidly than otherwise would have happened. The continuing emissions of CO2 from industrialized and developing nations will result in an exponential explosion of warming the longer it continues as the CO2 accumulates at faster and faster rates in the atmosphere, both because the previous emissions have not been absorbed and more people are emitting than ever. Therefore, we have to control emissions just to contain the damage, and it might already be too late!
Of course, that’s why everyone flew private jets to Copenhagen last month — in order to warn about carbon emissions.
If this University of Bristol analysis is correct, CO2 hasn’t been accumulating in the atmosphere at all. That means whatever warming we have experienced (and we have experienced warming) did not come from increased CO2 in the atmosphere. That would explain why we have experienced a cooling cycle for the last ten to twelve years despite an increase of CO2 emissions, albeit an increase at a slower rate than before. The new analysis completely destroys the AGW argument, because if CO2 is not accumulating in the atmosphere, it can’t be causing global warming.
No one doubts the necessity of curtailing particulate emissions into the air. If anyone did, the Beijing Olympics and the thick & chunky smog would have removed those doubts. Moving towards cleaner energy and renewables is a laudable goal and a necessary process. But succumbing to AGW hysteria and destroying the very economy that could produce that type of progress is not just absurd, it’s counterproductive to the goal.
Update: I changed the title of this post to more accurately reflect what UB found – no change in the ratio of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. One correspondent says that it doesn’t change the fact that we’re still dumping carbon into the atmosphere, where it could cause global warming. However, if the ratio of CO2 in the atmosphere hasn’t changed in 150 years, then the CO2 is getting reabsorbed, not remaining in the atmosphere to cause global warming. Unless there are other agents adding oxygen and nitrogen to the air and increasing the volume of all three, then the increased CO2 isn’t staying in the air. If CO2 accounted for 0.04% of the atmosphere in 1860 and 0.04% today, then CO2 isn’t a cause of warming — at least not now, and not over the last 150 years, as AGW hysterics claim.
Update II: A friendlier message says this:
The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing.
The percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing.
However, the percentage of CO2 on the planet which is airborne (as opposed to dissolved in the oceans, trapped in ice, or incorporated into biomass through photosynthesis) is not increasing. That is the meaning of airborne fraction. It doesn’t mean the fraction of the air which is CO2. It’s an easy mistake to make, and many others have on other sites.
Why this matters: One of the claims of the alarmists is that the oceans cannot hold any more CO2, that they are “saturated,” and therefore additional CO2 emissions will increasingly stay in the atmosphere. This now appears to be false. It undermines the alarmists’ arguments a little, but not too much. They will simply shift their position to: “Well, they oceans aren’t saturated yet, but they will be soon. And then the airborne fraction will increase dramatically. Just you wait.”
There are a couple of problems with this. First, AGW alarmists say that increased CO2 in the air causes global warming. Second, I’m old enough to remember rainforest hysteria, where we were all going to asphyxiate ourselves by chopping down trees that produced O2 from CO2, as we reduced biomass. If we’re producing larger biomass, then we’re creating more capacity to absorb CO2 and produce more oxygen (and food, too) as a result. And that’s supposed to be bad?
Update III: Here’s the summary from Knorr, emphases mine:
fyi
Gore and the warmists don’t wanna know. They’re right, and that’s that.
Most of the carbon dioxide emitted by human activity does not remain in the atmosphere, but is instead absorbed by the oceans and terrestrial ecosystems. In fact, only about 45 percent of emitted carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere.Doesn't matter -- the global warming demagoguery is entirely political in origin, and is entirely sustained by politics. When confronted by a failure of temps to rise year after year, the liars claimed that the heat was being stored at depth in the oceans (the oceans get colder and denser with depth); when confronted by the facts (after some expensive studies), the liars turned some other way and ignored the failure of their phony model, hiding behind personal attacks and appealing to authority -- which is what "peer-reviewed studies" amounts to when used by them (by ANY of them). Thanks Ernest.
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
|
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks Ernest_at_the_Beach. |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
Against my better judgment I've been sparring with some alarmists on another forum. When their glib Algore-like points are refuted they react as you suggest. They remind me of children who plug their ears, close their eyes, stamp their feet and say over and over again, "consensus"!
OTOH, I've been pleasantly surprised by how many articulate skeptics I've run across.
Good article. And it warrants attention.
The demagogues of the left are not articulate, they’ve merely rehearsed talking points, and regurgitate them as occasion arises.
Ha ha! No contest. People who know what to think can never win a debate with someone who knows how to think.
But...but...Al Gore promised us we were at fault and had to buy a lot of the products made by the companies he has invested it.
And now we have to wash our kid’s brains out with soap.
Nope, I can’t believe it. This is a matter of religious faith. Global Warming is real and caused by Bush.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.