The problem with CO2 is that it's a delayed process. We may not see the results globally of changes in CO2 until years later; unless it's a very localized even

The problem with CO2 is that it's a delayed process. We may not see the results globally of changes in CO2 until years later; unless it's a very localized event that affects the monitoring station https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/2016/08/31/brief-reprieve-from-400-ppm-era-may-be-thanks-to-a-hurricane/ https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/2016/08/31/br.... And even then, those small blips will be hard to call out/notice on a global scale (i.e. if we factored in multiple monitoring stations). Since most shorter term changes in CO2 will be localized and temporary, you're going to run into https://xkcd.com/1138/ https://xkcd.com/1138/. That's not to say that it wouldn't be a good idea to do, if we could attribute local events to local anomalies in CO2 we might be able to get people "incentivized" to get something that monitors it in their area and get some sort of gamification of groups trying to get their numbers lower.