Scientists have learned a lot about climate change in the last 20 years, but some questions remain unanswered. One of the most puzzling is that nobody knows where all of carbon dioxide emissions from around the globe end up every year.
Robert Lee Hotz, science writer for The Wall Street Journal, described this mystery in his Dec. 28 column, “Tracking Carbon Trail to Find Why So Much Fills the Atmosphere.” He writes that atmopsheric CO2 levels have jumped 35 percent in recent centuries, but that only accounts for half of emissions from human activity. Much of the CO2 remains in the atmosphere, a reality that could help to make 2007 one of the warmest years on record. Some goes into carbon “sinks,” such as plants, soil and the oceans. But apparently about 25 percent of what is emitted is unaccounted for.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration conducted a study of CO2 in North America from 2000-2006, consisting of 28,000 measurements taken weekly. Only one-third of the CO2 emitted in Canada, the United States and Mexico was taken up by carbon sinks. (See NOAA’s Carbon Tracker.)
Another recent study by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, a U.S. government body that integrates federal research into climate change, found the same trend.
A result of not knowing exactly where all the carbon dioxide goes could be that climate forecasts grossly overestimate — or underestimate — future temperature changes. This is probably why the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issues temperature change predictions in ranges, not absolutes. They predict temperatures will rise 1.98-11.5 degrees Fahrenheit by 2099, depending on greenhouse gas emission levels.
Hotz notes that “recent events have shown how vulnerable the world’s ability to recycle carbon can be to even modest increases in temperatures.” The U.S. drought of 2002 stunted plant growth so much that vegetation could not absorb as much carbon — thereby leaving emissions equivalent to that of the annual spew from 200 million cars (about the entire U.S. fleet). The map above is from the NOAA Carbon Tracker program and shows, for 2002, which areas absorbed less CO2 (in red) and areas that absorbed more (in blue).
Wildfires also increase CO2 levels — and droughts make wildfires more likely.
The carbon mystery is an important one to solve in order to better understand climate change and mitigate its risks.
U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007.
http://tinyurl.com/2dv6nz
Im with you Dr. Coles,Im with you. Please read the taskings of this old grid scientist and hit them with that information if you find any value to my taskings. I will task and task until they finally get the real clues they need and we all can get a rebate for their shenanigans.
Dr. Coles: Citing Senator James Inhofe’s (R-Ok.) blog does not make your case very credible. Inhofe has long claimed that climate change is a “hoax” — a ridiculous idea and simply a way to avoid discussing the issue.
Let’s move away from politics and talk about science. The best available science we have is described in the four reports the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) put out last year. I suggest everyone interested in climate change read at least the summaries of these studies. The IPCC explains what we know about climate change, what we don’t know, and what is likely to happen under various scenarios going forward.
Link: http://www.ipcc.ch/
Why are such generalized unscientific statements used in a supposedly scientific article about CO2 in the atmosphere? (”Tracking Carbon trail to find why so much fills the atmosphere”) (”atmospheric CO2 levels have jumped 35% in recent centuries.”)
(”Much of the CO2 remains in the atmosphere, a reality that could help to make 2007 one of the warmest years on record.”)
When I go to actual scientific sites, on the Web, I find that the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere is measured in parts per million, at .038% (38 one thousandths of one percent. The oceans of the world are measured at 1.9%, roughly 50 times that of the atmosphere. Thus the oceans and the atmosphere contain less than two percent.
CO2 levels have gone up in recent centuries by a percentage but those figures are represented in parts per million so why the hyperbolic rhetoric?
The statement that “2007 was headed to be one of the warmest years on record was just flat-wrong. It didn’t come close.
That term “so much” could more aptly be used to describe the amount of Junk Science that pervades the Web, these days. One thing is certain: It’s in much higher quantities than parts per million.
Science and Environmental Policy Project
http://www.sepp.org/
“The Great Global Warming Swindle,” article by S. Fred Singer
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1945
“Hundreds of scientists reject global warming”, article by Bob Unruh in Heat of the Moment, WorldNetDaily
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59319
New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfmFuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=84e9e44a-802a-23ad-493a-b35d0842fed8
Carl — Actually, 2007 was almost the warmest year on record. A NASA study put it at tied for second-warmest (with 1998) and a NOAA study put it at fifth-warmest. See my new post about 2007 temperatures here: http://blogs.earthsky.org/dankulpinski/2008/01/25/2007-continued-warm-trend/
It’s true that greenhouse gases do not make up a huge percentage of the atmosphere, but they do keep our planet warm enough to be habitable. (See this EPA link for the exact makeup of the atmosphere: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/glossary.html#atmosphere
Increases in CO2, however, have gone hand-in-hand with temperature increases for the past 400,000 years. See http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/pastcc_fig1.html
The concern about climate change comes from hard data such as this.