3 ms·
The difference between Satish-involved studies and other studies is extreme, too. Their first 2012 study tested levels at 600, 1000, and 2500ppm. In many catego
by Aurornis 4mo ago
The difference between Satish-involved studies and other studies is extreme, too. Their first 2012 study tested levels at 600, 1000, and 2500ppm. In many categories they observed the 2500ppm group receiving "dysfunctional" ratings in their tests. Even their 1000ppm group saw significant drops.
This sparked the panic about CO2 levels that led to people buying CO2 sensors and thinking that not unusual CO2 levels were actually destroying their ability to think. Many conclude that this has been happening all of their lives and to everyone around them who is unaware.
It triggered a lot of follow-up studies. Confusing, some of those (like the Harvard one everyone cites) included Satish, meaning they weren't independent despite coming from different organizations.
The really interesting thing is that many of the follow-up studies that don't include Satish have even used CO2 levels much higher than the 2012 study that caused the panic. Here is one I grabbed at random that went all the way up to 15,000ppm and failed to find any significant changes: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29789085/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29789085/
There was also a lot of CO2 research before Satish come along that failed to find significant effects at these relatively low levels. It has been researched in the contexts of air quality for submarines and space shuttles by militaries and NASA because keeping the crew of those operating optimally is important, clearly.
- schiffern 4mo agoCO2 on the ISS routinely gets up to 5 mmHg = 6,500 ppm, because the CO2 scrubber is more effective at that concentration. According to NASA it's "not practical from a hardware standpoint" to set the operational CO2 limit at 4,000 ppm. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20100039645/downloads/20100039645.pdf https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20100039645/downloads/20...