Jump to content

Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4 Million Years


RV_

Recommended Posts

I just found this from Scientific American.

 

Excerpt:

 

"The most remote continent on Earth has caught up with its more populated counterparts.

 

We’re officially living in a new world.

Carbon dioxide has been steadily rising since the start of the Industrial Revolution, setting a new high year after year. There’s a notable new entry to the record books. The last station on Earth without a 400 parts per million (ppm) reading has reached it.

 

A little 400 ppm history. Three years ago, the world’s gold standard carbon dioxide observatory passed the symbolic threshold of 400 ppm. Other observing stations have steadily reached that threshold as carbon dioxide spreads across the planet’s atmosphere at various points since then. Collectively, the world passed the threshold for a month last year.

 

In the remote reaches of Antarctica, the South Pole Observatory carbon dioxide observing station cleared 400 ppm on May 23, according to an announcement from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on Wednesday. That’s the first time it’s passed that level in 4 million years (no, that’s not a typo).

 

There’s a lag in how carbon dioxide moves around the atmosphere. Most carbon pollution originates in the northern hemisphere because that’s where most of the world’s population lives. That’s in part why carbon dioxide in the atmosphere hit the 400 ppm milestone earlier in the northern reaches of the world.

 

But the most remote continent on earth has caught up with its more populated counterparts.

 

“The increase of carbon dioxide is everywhere, even as far away as you can get from civilization,” Pieter Tans, a carbon-monitoring scientist at the Environmental Science Research Laboratory, said. “If you emit carbon dioxide in New York, some fraction of it will be in the South Pole next year.”

 

Much more details and videos pictures in the full article here: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/antarctic-co2-hit-400-ppm-for-first-time-in-4-million-years/

RV/Derek
http://www.rvroadie.com Email on the bottom of my website page.
Retired AF 1971-1998


When you see a worthy man, endeavor to emulate him. When you see an unworthy man, look inside yourself. - Confucius

 

“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” ... Voltaire

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a visual reference 400 ppm is the equivalent of one drop of water in a quart and a half - a very small ratio indeed.

 

The informative video in the link said that 1/2 of our CO2 emissions get absorbed by plants and the ocean (I'm assuming ocean plant life) and the other half remains in the atmosphere. Assuming that warming the planet slightly, getting rid of excess cold conditions and producing more arable land (with more plants that absorb CO2 at a faster rate as they are now growing at a faster rate) is a bad thing (how can more, faster growing crops feeding more of the worlds hungry be bad?) all we have to do to eliminate this effect is to cut our CO2 emissions by half.

 

Now here's the problem. The US (which only has about 10% of the global population) has already made great strides in emission reductions, (over a 12% reduction in CO2 emissions in the last 5 years), so it's time to convince the rest of the world (90% of the rest of the global population) to do the same. Good luck with getting them to even commit to slowing their rate of increase in CO2 emissions!

 

It seems that China has surpassed the US and now has the dubious distinction of being the #1 CO2 polluter in the world, equal to the US and the EU combined! http://www.pbl.nl/en/dossiers/Climatechange/Chinanowno1inCO2emissionsUSAinsecondposition Yet not to be content with this title, they continue to increase the rate of CO2 production by adding about one new coal fired power plant per week!

 

So it seems many global warming acolytes are content to preach to the choir, when they should be addressing the sinners at the brothel across town. ;)

 

Chip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Large portion of the CO2 in the ocean precipitates out as Calcium Carbonate - ie Limestone. That's how we get the White Cliffs of Dover. The ocean has been a large carbon sink but there is a limit as to how much it can take and we're probably close or at the limit. Problem with warming is that it increases the amount of moisture in the air, which then affects weather patterns and rains may not fall where you want them, more may fall than a region can handle (washing all crops down to the sea) or moisture may come at the wrong time.

 

Barb

Barb & Dave O'Keeffe
2002 Alpine 36 MDDS (Figment II), 2018 Ford C-Max HYBRID
Blog: http://www.barbanddave.net
SPK# 90761 FMCA #F337834

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I realize that science has advanced quite a bit since I was in school when they taught us we re headed for another ice age, but I was also taught that our global climate was a self regulating system, that is as you say, the hotter the planet, the more clouds are present. I learned that the white cloud tops reflected more heat into space so the planet absorbs less heat, which is at least one natural control mechanism preventing a run away greenhouse effect. I was also taught that another mechanism for climate self-regulation was as CO2 levels rise, plant life grows faster, producing more foliage, absorbing more of this essential pant nutrient, and increasing oxygen production supporting plant eating animals and insects to regulate this as well.

 

One thing I was also taught, that doesn't seem to be mentioned anywhere lately, was the amount of frozen methane hydrate trapped on the ocean bottom, and that if the ocean floor temperatures rose by just a few degrees, this methane (natural gas) would sublime and devastate our atmosphere with a much more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2, as our planet self-regulates CO2 quite well, but has no mechanism that could possibly absorb so much methane released too quickly. My question, is since we know it is down there and poses a real and present danger, why don't we (and by we I mean the US, as I hear the clever Japanese are already starting to harvest it) develop methods of harvesting this clean burning fuel, like we do with other deep water oil and gas drilling, before it is too late?

 

Chip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not trying to deny Global Warming or Climate Change. These are true problems. How ever today's measurements are exact at the time of measurement, the historic are based on ice sampling or tree rings and can only be averages at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A continued game of Russian roulette with the future of civilization at stake. I read an article by Bill McKibben that said that if all in ground fossil fuels already identified and claimed as assets on the books of energy companies are in fact utilized we will be in the worst case scenario territory. We won't be alive to see it but what are the chances of companies not exploiting what they already claim as an asset to investors?

Dave and Lana Hasper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-80F there yesterday.

Wanna do something for the environment, stop having so many kids. Nobody wants talk about that huh?

Retired USN Engineer

2020 Ram 2500 Bighorn 6.7 Diesel

2014 Crossroads Zinger 27RL (Traded)

2022 Grand Design Reflection 315RLTS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“There are three kinds of men. The ones that learn by readin’. The few who learn by observation.
The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.”

Will Rogers

RV/Derek
http://www.rvroadie.com Email on the bottom of my website page.
Retired AF 1971-1998


When you see a worthy man, endeavor to emulate him. When you see an unworthy man, look inside yourself. - Confucius

 

“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” ... Voltaire

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevermind.

Stephen & Karen and our six boys, ages 21, 21, 19, 17, 14, & 11
Stephen - Military retiree (as of summer 2012) & current DOI employee (Big Bend National Park)
Karen - Homeschooling stay-at-home mom & veteran
San Antonio, Texas

Fulltimed May 2013 - July 2014 (yes, all eight of us!)
Open Range "Rolling Thunder" (H396RGR - fifth wheel toy hauler bunkhouse) - SOLD
Ford F-350 diesel dually - for the camper
Ford E-350 fifteen passenger van - for the crew

Our unfinished travel blog: http://coach-and-six.blogspot.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-80F there yesterday.

Wanna do something for the environment, stop having so many kids. Nobody wants talk about that huh?

 

World over-population is a taboo subject everywhere. No one wants to discuss methods of population control. No matter, sooner or later Mother Nature will force the discussion one way or another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to North Carolina State University AG School, "A tree can absorb as much as 48 pounds of carbon dioxide per year and can sequester 1 ton of carbon dioxide by the time it reaches 40 years old."

 

To me, if Company 'XYZ' produces 40 tons of CO2 per year, then, if that very same company plants 42 trees each year - the amount of CO2 in the ocean and atmosphere would decrease. No Carbon Exchange, No extra taxes, No Bureau of Carbon Control. Of course, those who have chosen to advocate more complex and costly solutions would lose their monetary incentives - well, except the guys growing trees.

 

We already have a holiday for it - Arbor Day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After years of listening to folks saying what to do.. I always ask what have u done.

 

Well Todd and Heater how many trees have you planted on Arbor Day .....to compensate for the 1.3 billion people in China that have limited space to plant trees, to compensate for carbon imprint of coal plants in China.

 

Guess like many times before, this is what some one else needs to do.......Not me, i just want to give my opinion.

 

I agree on population control......there are a few Thousand kids from war torn countries that would like to have a home in your RV.........Do you need a number.

 

 

Trucken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Todd and Heater how many trees have you planted on Arbor Day

 

I (and my family) have planted at least one tree every Arbor Day since 1987. That's 35 trees in all = over 29 years. Soon, those same trees will collectively remove 1 ton of CO2 from the atmosphere each year - until they die. Now, that's just a drop in the bucket, but .....

 

Had 300 million people joined in the effort, well then, we'd really have something wouldn't we.

 

As far as China goes, I can't 'tell' them to plant trees any more than the Chinese Government found success with their "One Child Policy" in their efforts to limit population growth. People will choose to do whatever suites them. Besides, it really isn't the numbers of humans on the planet which presents the problem. It's the activities (like say, building a new coal fired plant each week) those humans choose to undertake which exacerbates the situation.

 

BTW, we didn't start planting trees all those years ago to save the planet. We did so to mark the passage of time, and to honor those who had passed on from this life. Trees are good like that. And, it turns out, have a few other beneficial uses too.

 

Good Travels to you all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Todd and Heather I applaud your efforts to plant 35 trees.. Thank you for the extra oxygen they provide.

 

Please tell me JUST how many people this wonderful world can support with currently 7.5 billion people and almost 800 million people are starving.

 

My god woman you believe this.

 

As far as China goes, it really isn't the numbers of humans on the planet which presents the problem. It's the activities (like say, building a new coal fired plant each week) those humans choose to undertake which exacerbates the situation.

 

Really can't understand this statement. Were you forced to install water,electric, and plumbing into your house or did you want it.

 

Trucken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Mark: RVs link is different than the one below, quit a difference.

 

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/ice_core_co2.html

 

Todd&Heather: just can't make your math work.

 

40 tons x 2000: 80,000 lbs.divided by 48lbs per tree per year equals 1600 trees---to cover XYZ company.....You must have super trees...

 

Planted 35 trees times 48 lbs per year equals 1680 lbs that doesn't even cover

 

the car you drive puts out 6 tons of carbon a year...unless it's a TSLA...

 

6x2000 equals 12,000 divided by 48 equals 250 trees necessary to cover your addition to the carbon problem...250-35 equals 215 more trees to plant. Unless you have more than one car of course..

 

Believe Georgia's Guidestones are correct.

 

Trucken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Todd&Heather: just can't make your math work.

 

If one tree removes one ton of CO2 from the atmosphere over the course of 40 years, how long would 42 trees need to remove that same ton of CO2?

 

https://www.ncsu.edu/project/treesofstrength/treefact.htm

 

42 trees times 48 pounds / year = 2016 pounds / year (just over one ton).

 

 

I (and my family) have planted at least one tree every Arbor Day since 1987. That's 35 trees in all = over 29 years. Soon, those same trees will collectively remove 1 ton of CO2 from the atmosphere each year - until they die.

 

We have seven more years to go (at most) before we reach the 42 trees planted threshold - hence 'soon.'

 

As far as my tree planting having a minimal effect on atmospheric CO2 levels, I'll quote Annie Savoy,

 

"You get three ants together, they can't do dick. You get 300 million of them, they can build a cathedral."

 

Good Travels to you all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Todd and Heather. If you look closely at the link that disagrees with the new data just found and printed in Scientific American that I linked to you will note that the newest data used in the bibliography was 2008, with much of the quoted in the bibliography from the 80s. late 90s, and no cited references newer than 2008 despite a 2010 date on one piece. To put that in perspective, in the late 70s/80s there were few CDs in our homes but growing however no CD recorders yet. No smart phones in fact. We had not mapped the human genome and it was not until 1981 that we identified the new Plague as Aids! Microsoft was not founded until 1975 and the Mac was not in existence until 1984. In 1999 Windows XP was still two to three years away.

 

I agree with your perspective and many more do than you might realize. Read this:

 

http://www.changeyourstars.com/StarThrower.html

 

Trucken,

Look at the old research you are referencing on that page, and yes you can take the whole titles and do searches and get dates for the ones omitted. It is strange that there are dates missing from the references. From the link I provided:

 

"In the remote reaches of Antarctica, the South Pole Observatory carbon dioxide observing station cleared 400 ppm on May 23, according to an announcement from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on Wednesday. That’s the first time it’s passed that level in 4 million years (no, that’s not a typo)."

 

That was May 23rd 2016. Please find a reference to anything this year that contradicts the new readings about the first ever rise to that level in the Antarctic from this year or at least in the last two years. 2008 was 8 years ago, an eternity in today's fast knowledge increases.

RV/Derek
http://www.rvroadie.com Email on the bottom of my website page.
Retired AF 1971-1998


When you see a worthy man, endeavor to emulate him. When you see an unworthy man, look inside yourself. - Confucius

 

“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” ... Voltaire

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...