The wonderful benefits of CO2!

”Do we live in a special time in which the laws of physics and nature are suspended? No, we do not. Can we expect relationships between the Sun’s activity and climate, that we can see in data going back several hundred years, to continue for at least another 20 years? With absolute certainty.”

Här kommer en mycket intressant analys (Solar Cycle 24: Implications for the United States) av David Archibald framförd under THE 2008 International Conference on Climate Change I New York 2-4 mars. Där Archibald betonar solens stora inverkan på klimatet. Analysen finns här:

http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/Solar_Arch_NY_Mar2_08.pdf

Se även några av mina tidigare inlägg om temperaturdata och CO2:

När CO2 var som störst var temperaturen som lägst!, Basic Greenhouse Equations ”Totally Wrong” – ytterligare ett anförande från konferensen i New York, $ 2,9 Biljoner i sänkt BNP för en sänkning av CO2 på 25 ppm!,  The Price Tag – Kostnaderna för Global Warming för VANLIGT FOLK!,  EU:s CO2 policy – The hot air of hypocrisy!, Kallaste januari sedan år 2000 – Hela Global Warming utraderad!Svenska folket – Ni har blivit grundlurade! 500 miljoner år av CO2 dataTemperaturen för 130 000 år sedanClimate Change – is CO2 The Cause?,  422 700 år av temperaturdata från Antarktis

Några fler citat:

”In this presentation, I will demonstrate that the Sun drives climate, and use that demonstrated relationship to predict the Earth’s climate to 2030. It is a prediction that differs from most in the public domain. It is a prediction of imminent cooling.

Then we will examine the role of the Sun in changing climate, and following that the contribution of anthropogenic warming from carbon dioxide. I will show that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is not even a little bit bad. It is wholly beneficial. The more carbon dioxide we can put into the atmosphere, the better the planet will be – for humans, and all other living things.

The satellite record is the highest quality temperature data series in the climate record. We have 29 years of satellite temperature data. It shows that the temperature of the Southern Hemisphere has been flat, with a slight increase in the Northern Hemisphere. Note the El Nino peak in 1998. Globally, we have had 10 years of temperature decline since that peak in 1998, with a rate of decline of 0.06 degrees per annum. I am expecting the rate of decline to accelerate to 0.2 degrees per annum from the end of this decade.

2008-04-01_175940.jpg

2008-04-01_182227.jpg

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>

Can global warming from increased atmospheric carbon dioxide save us from a collapse in mid-latitude agricultural production? Not at all.

2008-04-01_180923.jpg

2008-04-01_181154.jpg2008-04-01_181324.jpg2008-04-01_181404.jpg2008-04-01_181457.jpg2008-04-01_181520.jpg2008-04-01_181848.jpg2008-04-01_182920.jpg

2008-04-01_181916.jpg

2008-04-01_182148.jpg

2008-04-01_181705.jpg

Anthropogenic warming is real, it is also minuscule. Using the MODTRAN facility maintained by the University of Chicago, the relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide content and increase in average global atmospheric temperature is shown in this graph.

2008-04-01_182343.jpg

2008-04-01_182622.jpg

2008-04-01_182640.jpg

 2008-04-01_182757.jpg

The effect of carbon dioxide on temperature is logarithmic and thus climate sensitivity decreases with increasing concentration. The first 20 ppm of carbon dioxide has a greater temperature effect than the next 400 ppm. The rate of annual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide over the last 30 years has averaged 1.7 ppm. From the current level of 380 ppm, it is projected to rise to 420 ppm by 2030.

The projected 40 ppm increase reduces emission from the stratosphere to space from 279.6 watts/m2 to 279.2 watts/m2. Using the temperature response demonstrated by Idso (1998) of 0.1°C per watt/m2, this difference of 0.4 watts/m2 equates to an increase in atmospheric temperature of 0.04°C.

Increasing the carbon dioxide content by a further 200 ppm to 620 ppm, projected by 2150, results in a further 0.16°C increase in atmospheric temperature.

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, increased atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased the temperature of the atmosphere by 0.1°.

 

Carbon dioxide is not even a little bit bad. It is wholly beneficial.

 

This graph from a recent Idso paper shows plant growth response to atmospheric carbon dioxide enrichment. The 100 ppm carbon dioxide increase since the beginning of industrialisation has been responsible for an average increase in plant growth rate of 15% odd.

The 50% increase in plant growth rate due to a 300 ppm increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide can be expected about the middle of the next century. What a wonderful time that will be.

In a world of higher atmospheric carbon dioxide, crops will use less water per unit of carbon dioxide uptake, and thus the productivity of semi-arid lands will increase the most.

It’s not all good news. We will need this increase in agricultural productivity to offset the colder weather coming.

It also follows that if the developed countries of the world wanted to be caring and sharing towards the third world, the best thing that could be done for the third world is to increase atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Who would want to deny the third world such a wonderful benefit?”

Annonser

Etiketter: , , , , , , , , ,

9 svar to “The wonderful benefits of CO2!”

  1. The 800 year lag of carbon compared to temperature « UD/RK Samhälls Debatt Says:

    […] Watts Has Done On Documenting The Immediate Environment Of Suface Temperature Monitoring Sites,  The wonderful benefits of CO2!,  När CO2 var som störst var temperaturen […]

  2. The Best way to reduce CO2 emissions? – Civil War, Dictators, Political oppression and TOTAL poverty for the people! « UD/RK Samhälls Debatt Says:

    […] The wonderful benefits of CO2!, […]

  3. The world has never seen such freezing heat OR the Blunder with NASA: s GISS Temperature data « UD/RK Samhälls Debatt Says:

    […] Watts Has Done On Documenting The Immediate Environment Of Suface Temperature Monitoring Sites,  The wonderful benefits of CO2!,  När CO2 var som störst var temperaturen […]

  4. The wonderful benefits of CO2– The gas of life « The Daily Bayonet Says:

    […] The wonderful benefits of CO2! […]

  5. Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 358 « UD/RK Samhälls Debatt Says:

    […] The wonderful benefits of CO2! […]

  6. GLOBAL TEMPERATURE TRENDS FROM 2500 B.C. TO 2008 A.D. « UD/RK Samhälls Debatt Says:

    […] Of Suface Temperature Monitoring Sites,  New England winters have cooled in past decade,  The wonderful benefits of CO2!,  Manipulation av temperatur grafer men bara när de pekar nedåt!,  20 000 år av […]

  7. Lars Tuff Says:

    Golobal warming pop quiz:

    Given the total temperature record we now posess, from 500 million years ago until today, after about 150 years of research by thousands of scientists. Which of the following is true on any time scale from 20 years to 500 million years?

    CO2 rise gives
    a) temperature rise,
    b) temperature decline,
    c) no temperature change or
    d) any of the above

    The correct answer, of cource is d).

    Human CO2 emissions do not drive climate change. Nature does.

  8. Lars Tuff Says:

    This pop quiz will obliterate any claim that CO2 is the prime mover or culprit or dark hand that moves climate change. Ask the warmers this simplequestion:

    Show one single undefutable example that CO2 increase gives temperature rise, by using temperature data from the last 500 million years, on any timescale, from 20 years to 200 million years. Ad I will show you at least one, but in much cases many examples from the same temperature data which will falsify your example.

    The warmers do not have any shred of evidence.

    Therefore, ban CO2 taxation, sack the whole IPCC, and remove most of the futile and cost-driving green technology imidiately. Lower the coal price, the price of petrol, gas and so on.

    Then with 100% certainty the whole of human kind will benefit. The planet will become greener, and maybe the forthcoming little ice-age can be weakende a bit. We love CO2, the prime driver of life (beside the sun, that is).

  9. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks Says:

    TL;DR: In an atmosphere sufficiently dense such that collisional energy transfer can significantly occur, all radiative molecules play the part of atmospheric coolants at and above the temperature at which the combined translational mode energy of two colliding molecules exceeds the lowest vibrational mode quantum state energy of the radiative molecule. Below this temperature, they act to warm the atmosphere via the mechanism the climate alarmists claim happens all the time, but if that warming mechanism occurs below the tropopause, the net result is an increase of Convective Available Potential Energy, which increases convection, which is a net cooling process.

    Climate catastrophists claim CO2 causes catastrophic warming by absorbing 14.98352 µm radiation, becoming vibrationally excited, then transferring that vibrational mode energy to translational mode energy (which we sense as temperature), catastrophically warming the atmosphere.

    In reality that’s only half the story… and the climate alarmists have told the public only half the story as means of pushing a particular narrative. They have various reasons for doing so… the climate scientists have admitted (in their ClimateGate 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 hacked emails and outright) that in order to maintain their opulent funding they have to present scary scenarios (no one wants to richly fund them if there’s no looming catastrophe); and the socialists in the UN, US government and IPCC have outright admitted they’re using catastrophic anthropogenic climate change as a vehicle to deconstruct capitalism, de-industrialize, de-populate the planet and usher in a totalitarian socialist world-government.

    Particle physics and quantum mechanics shows that CO2 actually causes atmospheric cooling when the atmospheric temperature exceeds the point where the translational mode energy (kinetic energy) of two colliding molecules exceeds the lowest vibrational mode quantum state energy of the molecules capable of emitting IR.

    Energy flows from a higher energy regime to a lower energy regime… the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

    The Equipartition Theorem states that energy is shared equally amongst all energetically accessible degrees of freedom of a system. ”Energetically accessible” being a proviso that the energy must be sufficient to occupy the quantized energy states of electronic, rotational or vibrational modes for it to be shared in those modes.

    Think about it… N2 and O2 (comprising ~99% of the atmosphere) are homonuclear diatomic molecules and have no net magnetic dipole, so they cannot effectively emit (nor absorb) IR.

    N2 and O2 heat up via conduction by contact with the planet’s surface, but how do they cool down?

    Convection moves energy around in the atmosphere, but it cannot shed energy to space. Conduction depends upon thermal contact with other matter and since space is essentially a vacuum, conduction cannot shed energy to space… this leaves only radiative emission. The only way our planet can shed energy is via radiative emission to space.

    But N2 and O2 cannot radiatively emit because, being homonuclear diatomic molecules, they have no net magnetic dipole.

    Thus, common sense dictates that the thermal energy of the 99% of the atmosphere which cannot radiatively emit must be transferred to the so-called ‘greenhouse gases’ (which I call radiative gases or radiative molecules… CO2 being a lesser contributor in the lower atmosphere and the largest contributor in the upper atmosphere, water vapor being the main contributor in the lower atmosphere) which can radiatively emit and thus shed that energy to space.

    The only way our planet can shed energy is via radiative emission to space, thus the only molecules which can cool the atmosphere are the radiative molecules.

    The radiative cooling of air via solely translational mode energy converting to radiation
    CO2{v20(0)} (at 288K+) + CO2{v20(0)} (at 288K+) -> CO2{v20(0)} + C02{v21(1)} -> CO2{v20(0)} + CO2{v20(0)} + 667.4 cm-1

    You’ll note the above interaction is a direct conversion of translational mode energy (which we perceive as temperature) to 14.98352 µm radiation. This directly cools the air, and the effect is significant, since nearly all the translational mode energy is converted to radiation, leaving the CO2 molecules at a very low temperature, whereupon they absorb energy by colliding with other atmospheric constituents. The effect begins taking place significantly at ~288 K, the temperature at which the majority of the molecules will have sufficient translational mode energy to convert to vibrational mode energy.

    288 K also happens to be the stated average global temperature… that is not a coincidence, it is a mechanism long known [1], partly a result of CO2 radiative emission ramping up at ~288 K. As CO2 concentration increases, this effect will become more pronounced, increasingly damping any temperature excursions above ~288 K by increase of radiative emission via this interaction, and below ~288 K by reduction of radiative emission via this interaction.

    —–
    [1] apps [dot] dtic [dot] mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/725111.pdf
    The absorbed energy in Reaction (33) once again comes from translation. Two reactions of type (33) must occur for every one of the type indicated by Reaction (32) to maintain the CO2 in thermal equilibrium. The removal of energy from the translational modes by Reactions (32) and (33) cools the CO2 molecular system, and, concomitantly, the air.
    —–

    It is not necessary for CO2{v20(0)} to collide with another CO2 molecule for this interaction to take place, any other molecule will do… the Equipartition Theorem dictates that all atmospheric constituents at the same temperature will have the same translational mode energy. So in reality, the above interaction could be represented thusly:
    X (at 288K+) + CO2{v20(0)} (at 288K+) -> X + C02{v21(1)} -> X + CO2{v20(0)} + 667.4 cm-1
    where X is any atmospheric molecule.

    Further, you’ll note that if a CO2 molecule is already in the CO2{v21(1)} vibrational mode quantum state, a collision at just 0.1 K higher temperature (ie: ~288.1 K) can excite it to the CO2{v22(2)} state, whereupon it can emit a 14.97454 µm photon to de-excite to the CO2{v21(1)} state, and a 14.98352 µm photon to de-excite to the CO2{v20(0)} state.

    Even further, you’ll note that if a CO2 molecule is already in the CO2{v22(2)} vibrational mode quantum state, a collision at just 0.1 K higher temperature (ie: ~288.2 K) can excite it to the CO2{v23(3)} state, whereupon it can emit a 14.96782 µm photon to de-excite to the CO2{v22(2)} state, a 14.97454 µm photon to de-excite to the CO2{v21(1)} state, and a 14.98352 µm photon to de-excite to the CO2{v20(0)} state.

    This implies that for temperatures above ~288 K, more of the translational mode energy of atmospheric molecules will flow to CO2 vibrational mode quantum state energy, rather than vibrational mode quantum state energy of CO2 flowing to translational energy of other atmospheric molecules, simply for the fact that at and above that temperature, the combined translational energy of two colliding molecules is sufficient to excite the CO2 vibrational modes. This increases the time duration of CO2 vibrational mode quantum state excitation and therefore the probability that CO2 will radiatively emit, breaking LTE (Local Thermodynamic Equilibrium). Therefore the energy flow is to CO2, not from it.

    In other words, at and above ~288 K, the combined translational mode energy of two molecules is higher than C02{v21(1)} vibrational mode energy, and therefore energy will flow to CO2 from other atmospheric molecules’ translational mode energy during molecular collision, simply because CO2 can radiatively emit that energy and break LTE (Local Thermodynamic Equilibrium), rather than that energy flowing back to other molecules.

    In the past, the low CO2 level and the abnormally strong solar cycles of the Modern Maximum meant the planet could not effectively radiatively shed that energy to space, thus the planet warmed. Thankfully, the Modern Maximum has ended, the current solar cycle 24 is the weakest in ~200 years, CO2 atmospheric concentration is on the rise, OLR (Outgoing Longwave Radiation) has risen by ~6 W/m^2 over the past 62 years, and the planet is now cooling at the fastest rate (from 2016-present) recorded in the past century.

    The weak solar cycles are predicted to continue until ~2055, and the rising CO2 atmospheric concentration will dump increasingly more energy to space, continuing to cool the planet even after solar EUV insolation increases. So we’re in for an extended cooler period of at least a couple hundred years.

    There are additional energetic avenues by which CO2 acts as a net atmospheric coolant, notably the N2{v1(1)} –> CO2{v3(1)} pathway. This excites the CO2 to its highest vibrational mode quantum state, whereupon it partially de-excites by dropping from the {v3(1)} (asymmetric stretch) mode to either the {v1(1)} (symmetric stretch) mode by emitting a 10.4 µm photon, or to the {v20(2)} (bending) mode by emitting a 9.4 µm photon.

    N2 and O2 are homonuclear diatomic molecules with no net magnetic dipole, thus they cannot effectively emit (nor absorb) IR radiation. Therefore their vibrational mode quantum state excitation (brought about via collisional translational-vibrational (t-v) processes or via collision with an O3 molecule vibrationally excited by absorption of solar radiation) is relatively long-lived and metastable. The Boltzmann Factor shows that ~10.26671% of N2 molecules are in the N2{v1(1)} excited vibrational state due to (t-v) collisional processes at 288 K. Once N2 or O2 is excited, there is nowhere for that energy to go except to be transferred to radiative molecules.

    You’ll note I specify 9.4 µm and 10.4 µm above, whereas most texts specify 9.6 µm and 10.6 µm… that’s because those texts are usually talking about the same N2{v1(1)} –> CO2{v3(1)} process in CO2 lasers, and CO2 lasers use at least some proportion of the 13C isotope of CO2, whereas the atmosphere consists mainly of the 12C isotope. Heavier isotopes result in longer wavelengths. If what the Klimate Katastrophe Kooks claimed were true, CO2 lasers could not work.

    Therefore CAGW (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming) violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics at the quantum level… if the translational mode energy of two colliding molecules is higher than the energy necessary to excite one of the two molecule’s vibrational mode quantum state energy, then energy will flow from translational mode (which we sense as temperature) to vibrational mode, cooling the atmosphere.

    For CO2, and for the CO2{v20(0)} –> CO2{v21(1)} transition, that transition temperature is ~288 K. Above that temperature, CO2 acts as a net atmospheric coolant via radiative emission.

    For CO2, and for N2{v1(1)} –> CO2{v20(0)} –> CO2{v3(1)}, the cooling is dependent upon total N2{v1(1)} population, which is dependent upon temperature, but the cooling process takes place all the time, since at 288 K, there is only ~1.024835% of CO2 excited to CO2{v3(1)}, whereas there is ~10.26671% of N2 excited to N2{v1(1)}, per the Boltzmann Factor.

Kommentera

Fyll i dina uppgifter nedan eller klicka på en ikon för att logga in:

WordPress.com Logo

Du kommenterar med ditt WordPress.com-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Google-foto

Du kommenterar med ditt Google-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Twitter-bild

Du kommenterar med ditt Twitter-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Facebook-foto

Du kommenterar med ditt Facebook-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Ansluter till %s


%d bloggare gillar detta: