cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

CO2

Was at the San Diego Zoo Saturday and saw this display.  Everyone keeps talking about CO2 and how it is always around and that we need it to grow plants, etc.  Never really thought about it before but should have known that there is always an optimum amount and an amount that begins to decrease in effectiveness and becomes either harmful or less productive or both.  The following pictures illustrate that.  I couldn't get the very top of what is projected to be the level in 2050 but it was around 450.  

 

 

 co2.jpg

 

co2a.jpg

 

 

49 Replies
Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: CO2

I might regret asking this, but optimum for what, and by who's standard?

 

I went to ask.com and got this answer:

 

We conclude that atmospheric CO2 levels should be above 150 ppm to avoid harming green plants and below about 5000 ppm to avoid harming people. That is a very wide range, and our atmosphere is much closer to the lower end than to the upper end. The current rate of burning fossil fuels adds about 2 ppm per year to the atmosphere, so that getting from the current level to 1000 ppm would take about 300 years—and 1000 ppm is still less than what most plants would prefer, and much less than either the nasa or the Navy limit for human beings.

 

I was going to post a quote from the very first site that came up, but it mentioned the optimum Co2 level for growing Cannibus, so I quoted the 2nd, since I don't think anyone needs to know that.

 

The 3rd link had an interesting thing to say about the 'hockey stick' shaped curve of growing Co2 levels as they are projected:

 

The IPCC and its worshipful supporters did their best to promote the hockey-stick temperature curve. But as John Adams remarked, “Facts are stubborn things, and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” The hockey-stick curve caught the attention of two Canadians, Steve McIntyre, a mining consultant, and an academic statistician, Ross McKitrick. As they began to look more carefully at the original data—much of it from tree rings—and at the analysis that led to the hockey stick, they became more and more puzzled. By hard, remarkably detailed, and persistent work over many years, consistently frustrated in their efforts to obtain original data and data-analysis methods, they showed that the hockey stick was not supported by observational data. An excellent, recent history of this episode is A. W. Montford’s The Hockey Stick Illusion

 

But I don't know how objective that is, as it is as much a plug for the book mentioned as being scientific.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: CO2

Guess it depends on who you want to believe.

 

http://co2now.org/

Highlighted
Advisor

Re: CO2

Co2 levels now are significantly below much of our geologic past.
Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: CO2

They are much higher now than in the immediate past 600-700 years.  If you are talking several million years ago, who knows?  If you look at the chart here, the rise starts in the 1850s about the time the real heavy industrial age started.

Highlighted
Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: CO2

Projections are like, well you know.  Everybody has one.

 

The same people that are projecting these events are part of the same group that was projecting only 8% unemployment and part of the same group that are always surprised at the new unemployment reports or the new downturn in the stock market.

 

So far the places that have been seeing the effects of CO2 control have been those area's of business and labor as they lose jobs because of the new regulations and laws passed.

 

 

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: CO2

Conditions tens of millions of years ago have no real bearing on conditions now.

Highlighted
Advisor

Re: CO2

Ah, what? Only by studying the climate and all the variables that might impact it over time can you hope to come to any understanding. The humans time on this planet is statistically insignificant.
Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: CO2

Well, if you look at it carefully, you will soon see that AFTER man hit the earth and started large industrial complexes did the CO2 levels start to rise steadily.  Sure off and on thru out the early ages when there were no men interacting CO2 is estimated to have been higher but you don't know if that was because of the many volcanos active during that time or what.  Many dinosaurs farted a lot more than cows do.  I don't know but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that man's activities have contributed to the increase NOW.