5 ms·

That is all well and good, but high CO2 causes other issues than just warming. The only real fix is doing the hard thing, limit CO2. For example here os one c

• ctoth 3y ago
  - Cognitive effects show up well over 1000 ppm. - Current atmospheric concentration is around 417 ppm. - The rate at which atmospheric CO2 concentration increases has been approximately 2-3 ppm per year over the past decade, as observed at monitoring stations like Mauna Loa. If we hit 600 ppm and don't seem to be slowing down, maybe then I would worry about this but probably worry about ocean acidification before cognitive decline.
  • twojacobtwo 3y ago
    I have no expertise in this at all. How do they determine if cognitive effects only show up well above 1000? Is it possible that the testing methodologies aren't capable of detecting changes at a lower level? Edit( >In fact, at 1400 ppm, CO2 concentrations may cut our basic decision-making ability by 25 percent, and complex strategic thinking by around 50 percent, the authors found. If this is a continuous scale, it could be affecting us at lower levels already ) Further, isn't it reasonable to assume that regardless of the above, there will be 'hotspots' of c02 where the concentration may be hundreds of ppm higher than the average/background, at least temporarily (e.g. heavy industry centres, or cities in valleys)? Edit: The article mentions indoor levels are ~500 ppm higher than outdoor, so if a home is in one of my presumed hotspots, some people might be hitting these levels on occasion.
    • gravitronic 3y ago
      Oh, people hit that level all the time indoors. One person sleeping in a bedroom with a closed door overnight reaches high CO2 levels. A classroom of students are swimming in it.
    • dreamcompiler 3y ago
      I once stayed in a hotel with 1700 PPM in my room. It was a LEED Gold building sealed up tight. We didn't notice any cognitive issues but we made a point of not staying there long.
  • ericmcer 3y ago
    at that rate of increase (~300 years to reach 1000+) could we possibly adapt over time? There are probably already humans who are more/less susceptible to high c02 environments.
    • bobim 3y ago
      Individuals don’t adapt, a specie is through selection of best individuals. Since humans mostly managed to escape from selective pressure we are probably not going anywhere in such a short time I guess.
  • exe34 3y ago
    We double it every 35 years, so I don't think it's safe to assume linear growth.
  • russdill 3y ago
    Indoor air is going to be at some concentration above ambient. Raise the ambient concentration and you raise the indoor concentration. There's already many of indoor concentrations that are problematic.
    • _yb2s 3y ago
      I think this is an extremely important and little known fact.
  • antisthenes 3y ago
    > - Cognitive effects show up well over 1000 ppm. "Well over" is as little as 1500ppm. Definitely at 2500ppm. Reaching those numbers in poorly ventilated buildings is easy. > - Current atmospheric concentration is around 417 ppm. People mostly work indoors, so atmospheric concentration is not comparable. > maybe then I would worry about this but probably worry about ocean acidification before cognitive decline. True, you can always improve individual ventilation in rooms and houses until maybe 700-800ppm in the atmosphere, and at that level I would also worry about other things (ecosystem collapse, major weather events, fires and air pollution).
• enjrolas 3y ago
  I mean, that's true, but not relevant at the scale of the CO2 in the atmosphere. Think about breathing from a paper bag - your exhaled breath contains about 4% CO2, and after several cycles of re-breathing the same air, that percentage will increase, and you'll start to notice the effects you described, in the range of parts per hundred. CO2 from the ambient air you breathe is currently 0.04%, in the range of parts per ten thousand, two orders of magnitude lower than where you feel the effects you described.
• lm28469 3y ago
  Yeah and virtually every source of pollution brings more to the table than co2... much nastier things usually
• saiya-jin 3y ago
  I mean yeah, lets destroy our civilization (or whole mankind, who knows what desperate collapsing nations with nuclear weapons will do) as we know it so that we won't risk breathing 0.3% higher co2 concentration, seems logical. We would be such losers to use some simple cheap trick to give us some time to figure things out.
• darepublic 3y ago
  Lowering CO2 is important but is also very intractable international problem full of politics. So it makes sense that various people concerned about the environment propose to make an end run around all this mass of irrational savage humanity