4 ms·

If the fraction of anthropogenic CO2 has not increased in the past 160 years, BUT the amount of atmospheric CO2 has been slowly increasing over said period, wha

by teilo 17y ago

If the fraction of anthropogenic CO2 has not increased in the past 160 years, BUT the amount of atmospheric CO2 has been slowly increasing over said period, what does this have to say about AGW? My understanding has always been that the theory of AGW has always been contingent upon increasing levels of airborne ACO2. And if that is NOT true, then what exactly is the "A" in "AGW"? Edit: Not sure why I'm being downvoted, but I am asking an honest question. The theory of AGW has always included this scaling effect, whereby we reach a tipping point beyond which the airborne fraction continues to increase - meaning that more ACO2 increases the airborne fraction, which increases the percentage of ACO2 that remains in the atmosphere. What effect does this study, if true, have on said predicted feedback loop?

psranga 17y ago
Unless am also confused about this whole thread and misreading your comments, your reply seems to have fallen in the precise trap that this thread is talking about. The percentage of human-emitted CO2 released into the atmosphere has remained steady year-over-year for a long time. This means that since humans are pumping in more and more CO2 every year, more and more of it ends up in the atmosphere (since percentage is constant and absolutes is increasing). So this article is a direct refutation of your point. Please correct me if I'm mistaken on something here.
- teilo 17y ago
  That's just it. I'm not making a point. Knee jerk reaction going on here by someone. See the above edit.
kscaldef 17y ago
The comment to which you are replying is incorrect about what the "airborne fraction" means. Your point would be correct if that comment were correct. But, please see my correction to that comment.
blahblahblah 17y ago
I think the answer to your question is that the CO2 has been absorbed by the ocean's carbonate buffer system thus far and it's capacity to do this has either already been compromised in the recent past or is likely to be exceeded soon because the change in ocean pH is killing the sensitive lifeforms that are responsible for fixing CO2 as insoluble carbonates.

by teilo 17y ago

psranga 17y ago

Unless am also confused about this whole thread and misreading your comments, your reply seems to have fallen in the precise trap that this thread is talking about. The percentage of human-emitted CO2 released into the atmosphere has remained steady year-over-year for a long time. This means that since humans are pumping in more and more CO2 every year, more and more of it ends up in the atmosphere (since percentage is constant and absolutes is increasing). So this article is a direct refutation of your point. Please correct me if I'm mistaken on something here.

teilo 17y ago
That's just it. I'm not making a point. Knee jerk reaction going on here by someone. See the above edit.

kscaldef 17y ago

The comment to which you are replying is incorrect about what the "airborne fraction" means. Your point would be correct if that comment were correct. But, please see my correction to that comment.

blahblahblah 17y ago

I think the answer to your question is that the CO2 has been absorbed by the ocean's carbonate buffer system thus far and it's capacity to do this has either already been compromised in the recent past or is likely to be exceeded soon because the change in ocean pH is killing the sensitive lifeforms that are responsible for fixing CO2 as insoluble carbonates.