3 ms·
It's my understanding that the real reason we measure co2 is because it's easier to measure. Obviously, o2 is what's important, but they correlate when co2 come
by pkulak 2y ago
It's my understanding that the real reason we measure co2 is because it's easier to measure. Obviously, o2 is what's important, but they correlate when co2 comes from breathing out, so it's fine to just measure one. Maybe if you maintain a good o2 level, the co2 level just isn't that important?
But on the flip side... co2 is the only thing your body measures too! Which is why taking a breath of co2 from a soda bottle or something makes you breath like you're at the end of a marathon for a few seconds until it clears out. So I have no idea how 4000ppm wouldn't totally screw with your senses.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- lazide 2y agoNot really - oxygen is a large percentage of the atmosphere (21%), and co2 becomes noticeably bad at tiny fraction of a percent - 1000 ppm == .1% So even 2000-3000 ppm, which is quite noticeably stuffy and uncomfortable is only .2-.3%. Oxygen percentage isn’t going to be notably lower in these scenarios. At most 20%, though the stoichiometry makes it easier to calculate exactly.
- wahern 2y ago> So even 2000-3000 ppm, which is quite noticeably stuffy and uncomfortable is only .2-.3%. That's certainly the consensus internet "fact", which is presumably why this tweet was posted in the first place. Which poses the question, are astronauts on the space station uncomfortable?
- lazide 2y agoI’ve used co2 monitors (calibrated) and it’s quite noticable (as in ‘why is it so stuffy in here?’ then check and ‘ah, duh’). The astronauts likely just get used to it.