2015 Warmest Year on Record

[Lotta Booze]

What's utterly ridiculous - their models? I'd agree.

Do this, google "global carbon emissions increase 2020" and go back several years. What you'll notice if you do that is contrary to the news and media reports, global carbon emissions have been completely flat after massive growth in the preceding years and decades. In other words, our total global carbon emissions haven't increased in nearly a decade.

Yet what do we see in carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere? You can go here and look - if anything its getting worse.

Trends in CO2 - NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory

GML conducts research on greenhouse gas and carbon cycle feedbacks, changes in aerosols, and surface radiation, and recovery of stratospheric ozone.

www.esrl.noaa.gov

At some point people have to realize that we actually don't understand the trend and correlation between global temperatures and human activity.

There is a chart here that shows how global carbon emissions nearly quadrupled from 1960 to 2010. We've been flat now for nearly a decade, and yet we see no measurable difference in anything related to temperatures, global warming, or carbon dioxide concentrations.

Analysis: Global CO2 emissions set to rise 2% in 2017 after three-year ‘plateau’ - Carbon Brief

Over the past three years, global CO2 emissions from fossil fuels have remained relatively flat, however new data suggests this may be about to change.

www.carbonbrief.org

What's utterly ridiculous is that you'd expect a drop in temperatures based off of one year having a 6.5% reduction in emissions. Though you seem to be abandoning that point and if so, that's fine.

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove with the graphs you're sharing from NOAA, it looks pretty linear. That doesn't seem to jive with your description that it's getting worse "faster". I haven't dug too much into it but if that were the case it could be due to thawing permafrost in the arctic that many have been warning about for years. And to your comparison about the deficit and debt, if your deficit remains flat then your debt is still going to increase.

As for your timeframe from 1960 to 2010, what are you using to justify "no measurable difference in anything related to temperatures, global warming, or carbon dioxide concentrations"?
I think your own source at NOAA would disagree for temperatures and you yourself posted graphs showing the CO2 concentrations
History of Global Surface Temperature since 1880

 

[bobongo]

LOL. What if our deficit this year dropped precipitously to $100B, yet our debt increased from $27T to $33T - growing even quicker than previous years when we had trillion dollar deficits. Would you not scratch your head? Our carbon emissions over the last ten years have held flat and are essentially being produced at the same rate instead of what we would have expected based on the long run - a double. Yet if you look at the CO2 atmospheric concentration chart, the numbers are increasing even faster than they already were instead of slowing down.

Uh, if our deficit is $100B, the debt would increase by...$100B.

As for the issue at hand, CO2 emissions have levelled off, but it's still too much for carbon sinks to absorb, so atmospheric carbon is still on the increase. It's not increasing at any faster rate than before, just about the same as it was before emissions stopped increasing.

And where the hell do you think the atmospheric carbon dioxide is coming from, anyway, the tooth fairy?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

What's utterly ridiculous is that you'd expect a drop in temperatures based off of one year having a 6.5% reduction in emissions. Though you seem to be abandoning that point and if so, that's fine.

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove with the graphs you're sharing from NOAA, it looks pretty linear. That doesn't seem to jive with your description that it's getting worse "faster". I haven't dug too much into it but if that were the case it could be due to thawing permafrost in the arctic that many have been warning about for years. And to your comparison about the deficit and debt, if your deficit remains flat then your debt is still going to increase.

As for your timeframe from 1960 to 2010, what are you using to justify "no measurable difference in anything related to temperatures, global warming, or carbon dioxide concentrations"?
I think your own source at NOAA would disagree for temperatures and you yourself posted graphs showing the CO2 concentrations
History of Global Surface Temperature since 1880
View attachment 10374

You are really getting confused. Go back and look at the links and graphs I pointed to. I was talking about CO2 concentrations increasing at a faster rate than before despite CO2 emissions completely flattening out.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Uh, if our deficit is $100B, the debt would increase by...$100B.

As for the issue at hand, CO2 emissions have levelled off, but it's still too much for carbon sinks to absorb, so atmospheric carbon is still on the increase. It's not increasing at any faster rate than before, just about the same as it was before emissions stopped increasing.

And where the hell do you think the atmospheric carbon dioxide is coming from, anyway, the tooth fairy?

Exactly. Although my guess is you're still not getting it.

And you're wrong on the rate, go back and look at the CO2 charts from NOAA I pointed to - atmospheric carbon is increasing at a faster and faster rate based on the data they publish.

I'll ignore the tooth fairy point as that is a nonsensical snap related to nothing.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

So to make it more clear, here is NOAAs atmospheric CO2 chart they publish. I've added straight lines to show that the atmospheric concentration is getting worse and worse. That made sense a couple decades ago when we were doubling and tripling our annual carbon emissions every decade. But over the last decade the output has made a material change from 5%-7% growth a year to 0%-1%. Yet look at the chart - no slowing down at all. We will hit 420 heading into the summer.

 

[bobongo]

So to make it more clear, here is NOAAs atmospheric CO2 chart they publish. I've added straight lines to show that the atmospheric concentration is getting worse and worse. That made sense a couple decades ago when we were doubling and tripling our annual carbon emissions every decade. But over the last decade the output has made a material change from 5%-7% growth a year to 0%-1%. Yet look at the chart - no slowing down at all. We will hit 420 heading into the summer.

View attachment 10377

Did you know that atmospheric carbon comes from other sources besides emissions? One very obvious source is melting ice.

A melting Arctic is driving up carbon dioxide emissions, new US government report says - Bellona.org

Even if industry, power and transport could be revolutionized in that short period, a melting Arctic could still put those temperature goals out of reach. That’s because the Arctic may already have become a net emitter of carbon dioxide due to thawing permafrost, which will accelerate global warming, the new report says.

Permafrost is the carbon-rich frozen soil that covers nearly a quarter of the Northern Hemisphere. It encompasses huge swathes of territory across Siberia, Alaska, Greenland and Canada. These frozen Arctic soils are thought to contain some 1,460 to 1,600 billion metric tons of organic carbon, which can be converted into the greenhouse gases of carbon dioxide and methane by microbes in soil. These microbes become more populous as temperatures warm. As a result, melting permafrost across the world’s northerly climates could release twice as many greenhouse gases as are already in the atmosphere.

The Arctic Report Card 2019 shows that this process may already underway, concluding that permafrost ecosystems could be releasing as much as 1.1 billion to 2.2 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide annually – making the Arctic as big an emitter as Japan on the lower end and Russia on the higher.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

The Arctic Report Card 2019 shows that this process may already underway, concluding that permafrost ecosystems could be releasing as much as 1.1 billion to 2.2 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide annually – making the Arctic as big an emitter as Japan on the lower end and Russia on the higher.

The world produces about 40 Gigatons of carbon annually. The estimates for these other sources are definitely non-zero, but immaterial in comparison.

 

[bobongo]

The world produces about 40 Gigatons of carbon annually. The estimates for other sources are definitely non-zero, but immaterial in comparison.

Uh huh. Melting ice more than makes up for the levelling off we've seen in carbon emissions.

 

[Lotta Booze]

So to make it more clear, here is NOAAs atmospheric CO2 chart they publish. I've added straight lines to show that the atmospheric concentration is getting worse and worse. That made sense a couple decades ago when we were doubling and tripling our annual carbon emissions every decade. But over the last decade the output has made a material change from 5%-7% growth a year to 0%-1%. Yet look at the chart - no slowing down at all. We will hit 420 heading into the summer.

View attachment 10378

I think you're looking for the CO2 ppm measurements to be much more efficient in reflecting changes in emissions than reality, it's not going to be a 1 to 1 change. Like bobongo mentioned there are other systems that contribute and carbon sinks become less efficient at absorbing CO2 as they become saturated, oceans warm, Amazon gets burned down, etc.

 

[bobongo]

I think you're looking for the CO2 ppm measurements to be much more efficient in reflecting changes in emissions than reality, it's not going to be a 1 to 1 change. Like bobongo mentioned there are other systems that contribute and carbon sinks become less efficient at absorbing CO2 as they become saturated, oceans warm, Amazon gets burned down, etc.

Exactly.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Uh huh. Melting ice more than makes up for the levelling off we've seen in carbon emissions.

Number 1, no they don't. Globally we produce about 40 billion tons of CO2 per year. If the growth in those emissions had continued at its long run rate prior to about a decade ago (about 5% growth per year), we'd be at 50 billion tons of CO2 per year right now, not 40. That's 10 billion tons more of CO2 per year not emitted. Melting ice estimates are a tiny fraction of that. And...

Number 2, ice has been melting for decades (centuries) - it didn't just start. We're talking about 1-2 billion tons of CO2 per year...but that's not up from 0 a couple years ago. Its always been there, its just increasing.

Also, I do know its not a direct math equation - ie carbon emissions change 20% so don't expect the CO2 concentration or temperatures to change proportionally or immediately.

 

[bobongo]

Number 1, no they don't. Globally we produce about 40 billion tons of CO2 per year. If the growth in those emissions had continued at its long run rate prior to about a decade ago (about 5% growth per year), we'd be at 50 billion tons of CO2 per year right now, not 40. That's 10 billion tons more of CO2 per year not emitted. Melting ice estimates are a tiny fraction of that. And...

Number 2, ice has been melting for decades (centuries) - it didn't just start. We're talking about 1-2 billion tons of CO2 per year...but that's not up from 0 a couple years ago. Its always been there, its just increasing.

The rate of ice and permafrost melt has increased substantially, and...

The Arctic Report Card 2019 shows that this process may already underway, concluding that permafrost ecosystems could be releasing as much as 1.1 billion to 2.2 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide annually – making the Arctic as big an emitter as Japan on the lower end and Russia on the higher.

And I don't get your point, anyway. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing. Where do you think the increased atmospheric carbon is coming from?

 

[bobongo]

And I don't get your point, anyway. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing. Where do you think the increased atmospheric carbon is coming from?

Crickets.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

The rate of ice and permafrost melt has increased substantially, and...

The Arctic Report Card 2019 shows that this process may already underway, concluding that permafrost ecosystems could be releasing as much as 1.1 billion to 2.2 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide annually – making the Arctic as big an emitter as Japan on the lower end and Russia on the higher.

And I don't get your point, anyway. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing. Where do you think the increased atmospheric carbon is coming from?

I am not disputing any of that.

The rate of change in carbon emissions and the rate of change in CO2 concentration are moving in opposite directions. And apologies to Bobongo for taking more than 27 seconds to respond. He evidently thought you intimidated me. I was just busy. Sorry to disappoint you Bobongo.

 

[bobongo]

I am not disputing any of that.

The rate of change in carbon emissions and the rate of change in CO2 concentration are moving in opposite directions. And apologies to Bobongo for taking more than 27 seconds to respond. He evidently thought you intimidated me. I was just busy. Sorry to disappoint you Bobongo.

Uh huh. Yet you still didn't answer my question. Here it is again:

Atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing. Where do you think the increased atmospheric carbon is coming from?

 

[MWBATL]

Opinion | Climate Media vs. Climate Science

The good news is that scientists themselves have started to correct the record.

www.wsj.com

 

[MWBATL]

Uh huh. Yet you still didn't answer my question. Here it is again:

Atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing. Where do you think the increased atmospheric carbon is coming from?

Just curious......

Since according to the archeological record, the earth has had higher levels of CO2 long long ago (way before man was ever around), are you of the belief that mankind can somehow control the planet's climate?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Uh huh. Yet you still didn't answer my question. Here it is again:

Atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing. Where do you think the increased atmospheric carbon is coming from?

What kind of question is that? Humans, cows, permafrost, etc.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Just curious......

Since according to the archeological record, the earth has had higher levels of CO2 long long ago (way before man was ever around), are you of the belief that mankind can somehow control the planet's climate?

Well the unfortunate part of your question is that we have a decade of significantly flattening carbon emissions, including a massive 6.5% drop last year (14% in the US), and the answer we're being told is to not expect even a 0.01 degree temperature change from where we are compared to where we would have been, and don't even expect carbon dioxide concentration to reflect that trend at all either.

 

[MWBATL]

Opinion | How a Physicist Became a Climate Truth Teller

After a stint at the Obama Energy Department, Steven Koonin reclaims the science of a warming planet from the propaganda peddlers.

www.wsj.com