Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Poll

What will 2019's annual C02 concentration growth be over 2018?

≤ 2.0 ppm
0 (0%)
2.1 - 2.5 ppm
11 (33.3%)
2.5 - 2.9 ppm
17 (51.5%)
3.0 - 3.4 ppm
4 (12.1%)
≥ 3.5 ppm
1 (3%)

Total Members Voted: 32

Voting closed: February 02, 2019, 12:48:04 AM

Author Topic: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels  (Read 17855 times)

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4721
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 635
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #100 on: April 18, 2019, 08:15:16 PM »
Keeling Curve last value is Apr 5
Last tweet at https://twitter.com/Keeling_curve is Apr 12
"A cooling fan in the continuous measurement instrument has failed; it will be replaced soon."

Given the importance of those reference values, strange there is no backup instrument, and that a failed cooling fan put the measures on standstill for two weeks.

I am somewhat confused as
- https://www.co2.earth/daily-co2 reports Mauna Loa data and has a reading of 413.09 as at 16 April,
- which in turn they get from https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/monthly.html which has a reading of 413.63 as at 17 April,
- which gets their data from the Mauna Loa observatory run by the Scripps Institute of Oceanography which has not updated since April 5..



Recent Daily Average Mauna Loa CO2
April 17:     413.63 ppm
April 16:     413.09 ppm
April 15:     412.67 ppm
April 14:     414.56 ppm
April 13:     414.10 ppm
Last Updated: April 18, 2019
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2190
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #101 on: April 18, 2019, 08:32:14 PM »
Quote
Ongoing comparisons of independent measurements at the same site allow an estimate of the accuracy, which is generally better than 0.2 ppm.
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/about/co2_measurements.html

So independent measurements going on at same site, so it appears that one but not all of these are affected. That makes sense if they are aiming to be independent measurements.

wolfpack513

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 131
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 27
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #102 on: April 18, 2019, 10:25:53 PM »
March 2019 growth over 2018 came in at 2.56 ppm.  Running 12-month average is climbing but still below the linear trend of ~2.60 ppm/year².  Still expect the running 12-month to be back above the linear trend soon. 

*Important to remember the linear trend on this chart is a rate change of a rate change.  A positive slope is acceleration.

ASILurker

  • Guest
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #103 on: April 22, 2019, 06:38:57 AM »
MLO growth dips a little this last week.

Week beginning on April 14, 2019:      413.59 ppm +2.60 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:      410.99 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:      388.66 ppm
Last updated: April 21, 2019

Prior 2 weeks +3.06 and +3.67.

Last 5 weeks avgs. 411.82, 411.32, 412.21, 413.13, 413.59

Post-Feb it seemed possible May's yearly high could breach 415.25 ppm if the short term growth trend continued. This looks unlikely now. My expectation that April would hit 413 ppm and/or +3.50 ppm wasn't far off though.

From here if the enso doesn't produce an el nino of substance later in the year then CO2 growth won't crack +3 ppm for 2019 (imo). While global temps may still be in the top 3 or 4 years ever anyway.

Stephan

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 66
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #104 on: April 25, 2019, 09:05:39 PM »
Week beginning on April 14, 2019:     413.59 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:       410.99 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     388.66 ppm
Last updated: April 25, 2019
This week's increase (2.60 ppm/year) is almost matching the 10-year increase (24.93 ppm = 2.49 ppm/year). I wonder which value of the May maximum we will see before the CO2 content decreases again according to the natural annual cycle.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #105 on: April 28, 2019, 11:46:44 PM »
We are near the seasonal peak in Mauna Loa CO2 levels, and there can be quite a lot of volatility from week to week at this time. So the weekly numbers may be a bit misleading for a little while. The year over year increase fell to 2.07ppm for the latest week, but could jump quite significantly in the current week given last years weekly value (then the opposite the following week).

The April+May monthly values will probably be a better representation of the trend.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4721
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 635
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #106 on: April 29, 2019, 08:54:34 PM »
Here is a two year graph from Scripps.

The volatility of the daily readings this year seems a lot higher than the previous year.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #107 on: April 29, 2019, 09:29:19 PM »
I wonder if there is a correlation in increased statistical volatility and the start of El Nino's, otherwise an interesting new phenomena.

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1732
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #108 on: April 29, 2019, 10:41:53 PM »
I wonder if there is a correlation in increased statistical volatility and the start of El Nino's, otherwise an interesting new phenomena.
Makes sense anyway, it's not like El Nino appears from a vacuum but hotter surface waters may be seen irregularly before on varoous patches of tropical Pacific.
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #109 on: April 30, 2019, 02:32:25 AM »
The carbon cycle response to two El Nino types: an observational study

Interesting paper on the relationship between El Nino's and CO2 levels at Mauna Loa. From their time series, looks like the whole series is just very noisy.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa9c5b/pdf


Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1732
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #110 on: April 30, 2019, 06:37:22 AM »
The carbon cycle response to two El Nino types: an observational study

Interesting paper on the relationship between El Nino's and CO2 levels at Mauna Loa. From their time series, looks like the whole series is just very noisy.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa9c5b/pdf
Yes, interesting. They use the tropical troposphere temperature to calculate this which is better and allows for more detailed conclusions than using the whole globe average T. At the time scales involved, it might be prudent to do the same for a tropical Atlantic or Indian Ocean CO2 measurement station if there would be one with a long enough record, some might start on the 1980s, but not sure (st.Helens?). The differences between Modoki and the regular El Nino are becoming clearer, I guess. Detrending is an essential tool to make the analyses easier, if someone wonders why they do that, I guess the same might be done without but the maths involved would be too difficult to follow for many. This one, even I, with only a couple of professional statistics courses of the local university, could follow but would have to ask help to try to replicate.

As for the noisiness of the record, that's just what observation based science, in biology geography, meteorology, even traffic planning etc, possibly quickly changing subjects of study, is all about. I think the Mauna Loa record is notably clear dataset, but that's probably just a result of seeing friends dealing with data series on attributes of plants or animals. Most biologists i know would be deliriously happy to have such a long and consistently measured record. This is why biologists are promoting hobbyists to stay in one place, it's of more scientific value than twitching or chasing rare species all around...
« Last Edit: April 30, 2019, 07:44:02 AM by Pmt111500 »
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2190
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #111 on: May 04, 2019, 06:30:41 PM »
Highest couple two of three highest days ever recorded:

Quote
May 03:     414.81 ppm
May 02:     Unavailable
May 01:     414.88 ppm
April 30:     414.52 ppm
April 29:     Unavailable

(other one is
March 18:     414.84 ppm)

Sparkles

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #112 on: May 04, 2019, 08:10:44 PM »
https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/ 



currently shows it as 415.09ppm for May 3rd, I've noticed that different sites https://twitter.com/CO2_earth and https://twitter.com/keeling_curve sometimes give slightly different values for each day's results
« Last Edit: May 04, 2019, 08:35:58 PM by Sparkles »

Stephan

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 66
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #113 on: May 04, 2019, 08:54:29 PM »
Last year the average value of the week End April/Beginning May was below 410 ppm. If you look at the latest available data the increase will be around or slightly higher than 4 ppm/year.
In contrast the week beginning thereafter was around 411 ppm, so this difference will decrease again.
Anyway, the big variations of daily values (clearly visible in the "Last Year Folder") since January are disturbing. I guess the apparatus and the evaluation methods are still excellent and no reason for these fluctuations. What bothers me is the possibility that we are moving towards a tipping point, into a new state, which could be "announced" by higher variability of values that had been stable/predictable/linear for years.

Stephan

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 66
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #114 on: May 05, 2019, 09:05:40 PM »
Last year the average value of the week End April/Beginning May was below 410 ppm. If you look at the latest available data the increase will be around or slightly higher than 4 ppm/year.
In contrast the week beginning thereafter was around 411 ppm, so this difference will decrease again.
....
And here it is. The first (to my knowledge, please correct me if I'm wrong) yearly increase of more than 4 ppm:
Week beginning on April 28, 2019:     414.32 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:             409.84 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     390.36 ppm
Last updated: May 5, 2019

Next week this increase will be quite lower, due to a much higher value last year

bluice

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #115 on: May 06, 2019, 10:34:25 AM »
A lurker signing in here

I've been watching co2 figures with amazement this year. Weekly figure is of course noisy but a 4,48 ppm jump is huge.

Is this only anthropocenic, or are we witnessing a new feedback loop kicking in? If yes, what could it be? This isn't yet the season for permafrost melting.

ASILurker

  • Guest
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #116 on: May 06, 2019, 06:28:49 PM »
A lurker signing in here

I've been watching co2 figures with amazement this year. Weekly figure is of course noisy but a 4,48 ppm jump is huge.

Is this only anthropocenic, or are we witnessing a new feedback loop kicking in? If yes, what could it be? This isn't yet the season for permafrost melting.

Hi. Good questions. Answers not so easy to come by. Some feel the ENSO maybe driving up the numbers - I am not sure. History has shown the exceptional eventually becomes the norm. Be it CO2 growth, ASI loss/extent, global temps growth, and on and on.

The immediate question could be: will MLO CO2 crack 415 ppm in May as a daily or a weekly figure?

MLO Month of April data in

April 2019:        413.32 ppm +3.08
April 2018:        410.24 ppm
Last updated: May 6, 2019
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/index.html

May avg 414.50 ?

Stephan

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 66
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #117 on: May 06, 2019, 07:15:19 PM »
A lurker signing in here

I've been watching co2 figures with amazement this year. Weekly figure is of course noisy but a 4,48 ppm jump is huge.

Is this only anthropocenic, or are we witnessing a new feedback loop kicking in? If yes, what could it be? This isn't yet the season for permafrost melting.
You must take into account the very variable weekly averages this year and last year. Probably "by chance" a very low (compared to the neighbouring weeks) weekly average 2018 and a very high weekly average 2019 matched to produce this very high difference. Next week(s) this difference will be much smaller - if growth rates of around 2.5-3 ppm/year may be declared as "smaller" at all.
The great concern is the rapid, erratic up and down of daily changes, which can be a sign of a complete system change. Are we close to a tipping pont?

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2463
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 192
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #118 on: May 06, 2019, 07:43:18 PM »
And welcome to the ASIB, bluice!
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1732
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #119 on: May 06, 2019, 07:49:05 PM »
A lurker signing in here

I've been watching co2 figures with amazement this year. Weekly figure is of course noisy but a 4,48 ppm jump is huge.

Is this only anthropocenic, or are we witnessing a new feedback loop kicking in? If yes, what could it be? This isn't yet the season for permafrost melting.

Don,t know how widespread the cold blast from the arctic was but at least here it essentially stopped the spring progress, and thus absorption of CO2 by plants. Ooops, this was about Mauna Loa numbers, might want to check the Pacific temperatures near Hawaijii and thereabouts. Large a rise but there have been also very small rises this time a year, maybe a batch of winter Arctic air has reached a warm spot in the ocean near Mauna Loa.
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

dbarce

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #120 on: May 06, 2019, 11:29:47 PM »
They just posted a correction on twitter:
Quote
The 415.09 ppm value that appeared as the daily baseline for 3-May-2019 on certain graphics over the weekend was based upon a partial days data and incorrectly released on the website. The correct value for that date based upon the full 24 hour period is 414.15 ppm

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 33
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #121 on: May 06, 2019, 11:49:40 PM »
MLO Month of April data in
April 2019:        413.32 ppm +3.08
April 2018:        410.24 ppm
Last updated: May 6, 2019
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/index.html
May avg 414.50 ?

Quite possible I would think, and would give us a May y-o-y increase of over 3ppm. With the Jan-April numbers being 2.87ppm, 3.43ppm, 2.51ppm, and 3.08ppm that would probably make for a first five months average growth rate of over 3ppm. Given the rather muted ENSO, certainly some cause for concern.

The global CO2 growth number for February also came out - at 2.64ppm year over year, and the 2018 as a whole number was updated to 2.48 now that the February numbers are in. That should be pretty much the final global growth number (they use Nov-Dec-Jan-Feb to get the year over year growth rate).

Global methane concentrations grew by 10.77ppb in 2018 (highest since 2014), and were up by over 11ppb in January year-over-year. The jump in the CO2 equivalent numbers (all greenhouse gases) for 2018 that should be published in the next month or so should be quite a big one given the CO2 and methane increases.

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/gl_gr.html

ASILurker

  • Guest
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #122 on: May 07, 2019, 03:24:45 AM »
MLO Month of April data in
April 2019:        413.32 ppm +3.08
April 2018:        410.24 ppm
Last updated: May 6, 2019
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/index.html
May avg 414.50 ?

Quite possible I would think, and would give us a May y-o-y increase of over 3ppm. With the Jan-April numbers being 2.87ppm, 3.43ppm, 2.51ppm, and 3.08ppm that would probably make for a first five months average growth rate of over 3ppm. Given the rather muted ENSO, certainly some cause for concern.

Yes indeed.

MOST RECENT GLOBAL CO2 DATA
Nov-Feb Growth numbers are - 2.68, 2.83, 2.48 and 2.64 ... avg + 2.66 ppm

One can see the difference in the "lines/angles" between recent years and now already


swoozle

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #123 on: May 07, 2019, 04:52:56 AM »
Y-o-y increase for last week (start April 28) was posted today as 4.48!

edit: ha, never mind, I see that last year the weekly average was oddly low

wdmn

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 220
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 54
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #124 on: May 07, 2019, 08:18:26 AM »
Y-o-y increase for last week (start April 28) was posted today as 4.48!

edit: ha, never mind, I see that last year the weekly average was oddly low


Sure 4.48 is high, but 2.07 the week before was quite low. It gets washed out in the rinse in the monthly numbers. Besides these up/down moves have been happening all the time where weekly numbers are concerned but they have never hit 4.48 before. It's still "remarkable" and a genuine "record" :)


See reply #122 from dbarce, their was a correction in the measurement, and 4.48 does not stand.

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2190
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #125 on: May 07, 2019, 02:21:43 PM »
See reply #122 from dbarce, their was a correction in the measurement, and 4.48 does not stand.

Actually it is Scripps (measure posted on CO2.earth) daily measure of 415.09 for May 3rd that does not stand. The 4.48 is the weekly difference shown on ESRL:
Quote
Week beginning on April 28, 2019:     414.32 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:     409.84 ppm

AFAIK that 4.48 still stands.

Definite up and down spikes in 2018 on ESRL whereas 2019 looks noisy over long period:


wolfpack513

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 131
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 27
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #126 on: May 07, 2019, 10:36:06 PM »
April 2019 came in at 413.32 ppm.  That's a 3.08 ppm increase over April 2018.  Running 12-month is now closing in on the linear trend which is around 2.60 ppm per year.

As mentioned before... the positive slope is a rate change of a rate change.

silkman

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 293
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #127 on: May 08, 2019, 09:23:25 AM »
I've posted this a couple of times before but the Keeling Curve full record clearly shows "a rate change of a rate change" throughout with no noticeable impact in the post Kyoto era. Acceleration of carbon emissions remains the order of the day. As Mr Trump might say (but won't!). Not good!




Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1732
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #128 on: May 10, 2019, 11:51:49 AM »
I've posted this a couple of times before but the Keeling Curve full record clearly shows "a rate change of a rate change" throughout with no noticeable impact in the post Kyoto era. Acceleration of carbon emissions remains the order of the day. As Mr Trump might say (but won't!). Not good!
Yep, the only dent in the parabolic (well sigmoidal might be better word) curve is when Soviet economy and manufacturing collapsed for the reorganization to the current system.
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

ASILurker

  • Guest
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #129 on: May 12, 2019, 02:48:34 AM »
For 2 weeks now readings are steady in the 414s - typically MLO CO2 peaks in middle of May

This week will still be above +3 ppm growth

May 10:      414.26 ppm
May 09:      414.23 ppm
May 08:      414.50 ppm
May 07:      414.24 ppm
May 06:      414.49 ppm
May 05:      414.10 ppm

2018   5   6  2018.3438    411.06

Saw interesting refs from sleepy this week, saying global GHG emissions need to be cut by 50% per decade for 3 decades straight to get down to zero net ghg emissions and stabilisation by 2050. 

This means that all the developed nations must cut their emissions by even more than 50% between now and 2030 ... like that's going to happen, not! 


Anyway I'm wondering if the recent rise to an average 2.5 ppm growth is in the process of shifting up to a +3 ppm growth rate as the new normal for the next decade - with el ninos pushing it even higher again? Not a claim only a thought bubble - the previous avg. +2ppm annual growth rate never lasted long that's for sure!

It's a sad state of affairs imho. Can't say I didn't see it coming though a long time ago. The long term rhetoric coming the body of climate scientists and the UNFCCC has really not cut it - they have not properly communicated the dire straits the world was in long ago and not been able to override the BS from politicians and the media etc.

Now with the community of nations at each others throats for all manner of reasons the short term opportunity for serious agreements on climate action, and GHG cuts is Zero or less.

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot - that's an understatement!
« Last Edit: May 12, 2019, 02:55:42 AM by Lurk »

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1732
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #130 on: May 12, 2019, 12:15:10 PM »
10 year averages on CO2 growth shows the dent in the 1990s much clearer.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2019, 04:00:28 PM by Pmt111500 »
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

Sleepy

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1154
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #131 on: May 12, 2019, 02:39:37 PM »
Now you will have to edit your post again Pmt, I simply forgot that it's bad practice to quote Lurk since he's obviously on many members ignore lists and that might disturb their online experience. Sorry.
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1732
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #132 on: May 12, 2019, 04:03:45 PM »
Now you will have to edit your post again Pmt, I simply forgot that it's bad practice to quote Lurk since he's obviously on many members ignore lists and that might disturb their online experience. Sorry.
Done, should also lube my bike. And yes he is. I had a spree of ignoring sometime last winter, and this might result in odd communications between me and an ignored person.
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

Stephan

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 66
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #133 on: May 12, 2019, 04:32:09 PM »
10 year averages on CO2 growth shows the dent in the 1990s much clearer.
You should keep in mind that 1991 and 1992 were those two years which saw the collapse of most of the Eastern European / Soviet economies (much of it was energy-intensive and not "green"). For this reason these two years should be somehow excluded from evaluation. And if you did that the 90s had almost the same CO2 increase rate than the 80s.

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1732
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #134 on: May 13, 2019, 11:04:32 AM »
Kiwichick is on topic elsewhere, 415ppm topped, some denier may have to enlarge his graph on this.

not sure if this is the right place but.......CO2  has hit 415 ppm at Mauna Loa for the first time ever

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4721
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 635
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #135 on: May 13, 2019, 11:07:10 AM »
Kiwichick is on topic elsewhere, 415ppm topped, some denier may have to enlarge his graph on this.

not sure if this is the right place but.......CO2  has hit 415 ppm at Mauna Loa for the first time ever

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/
"CO2 is good for you!!" = denier spiel para 7.6.2(iv)
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Stephan

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 66
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #136 on: May 13, 2019, 10:15:54 PM »
Another week with an increase of more than 3 ppm - this time with an average value one year ago:
Week beginning on May 5, 2019:     414.37 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:             410.77 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     389.79 ppm
Last updated: May 13, 2019
Next week it must look better (last year's weekly average was around 412 ppm - the maximum of 2018)

ASILurker

  • Guest
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #137 on: May 15, 2019, 07:34:50 AM »
2 days in a row above 415
May 13:      415.40 ppm
May 12:      415.27 ppm

which is +1 ppm above the last 2 weeks avg. ... "we're cookin' with gas!"

b_lumenkraft

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 804
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 165
  • Likes Given: 1002
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #138 on: May 15, 2019, 07:57:00 AM »
Quote
Atmospheric carbon dioxide sets a new record every year. This year’s cracked the ominous milestone of 415 parts per million (ppm) thanks to ever rising emissions from human activities. The sharp rise might seem like something nobody could’ve predicted but there’s at least one group of scientists that were on the money 37 years ago: Exxon’s ace team of scientists.

Link >> https://earther.gizmodo.com/exxon-predicted-2019-s-ominous-co2-milestone-in-1982-1834748763

Stephan

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 66
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #139 on: May 16, 2019, 11:03:29 PM »
2 days in a row above 415
May 13:      415.40 ppm
May 12:      415.27 ppm

which is +1 ppm above the last 2 weeks avg. ... "we're cookin' with gas!"
Edited May 16, 2019:
May 16:    415.58 ppm (almost as high as yesterday)
May 15:     415.64 ppm
May 14:     415.26 ppm
May 13:     415.40 ppm
May 12:     415.27 ppm
May 11:     414.75 ppm
Last Updated: May 1617, 2019
...which means that we will be above more than 3 ppm from last year's value, which was the highest value in 2018...
« Last Edit: May 17, 2019, 06:00:21 PM by Stephan »

Stephan

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 66
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #140 on: May 19, 2019, 09:19:31 PM »
Another week with > 3 ppm yearly increase. Bad in fact, as it topped last year's maximum by more than 3.5 ppm:
Week beginning on May 12, 2019:     415.39 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:             411.84 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     390.12 ppm
Last updated: May 19, 2019
A chaotic day with high variability does not deliver a daily average today. From the hourly averages it might be concluded that 2019's maximum happened on May 15 with 415.64 ppm.
Last year's average the following week was around 411.5 ppm. To receive a difference below 3 ppm/year next week a decrease by about 1 ppm or more from this week's values is necessary.

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1732
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #141 on: May 20, 2019, 02:03:12 PM »
Another week with > 3 ppm yearly increase. Bad in fact, as it topped last year's maximum by more than 3.5 ppm:
Week beginning on May 12, 2019:     415.39 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:             411.84 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     390.12 ppm
Last updated: May 19, 2019
A chaotic day with high variability does not deliver a daily average today. From the hourly averages it might be concluded that 2019's maximum happened on May 15 with 415.64 ppm.
Last year's average the following week was around 411.5 ppm. To receive a difference below 3 ppm/year next week a decrease by about 1 ppm or more from this week's values is necessary.
Someone said on ENSO-thread that a Modoki Nino is on. This would probably keep the central Pacific values of CO2 a bit higher than normal, as the surfacing hotter waters exhale gases.
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

ASILurker

  • Guest
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #142 on: May 20, 2019, 03:06:21 PM »
Another week with > 3 ppm yearly increase. Bad in fact, as it topped last year's maximum by more than 3.5 ppm:
Week beginning on May 12, 2019:     415.39 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:             411.84 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     390.12 ppm
Last updated: May 19, 2019
A chaotic day with high variability does not deliver a daily average today. From the hourly averages it might be concluded that 2019's maximum happened on May 15 with 415.64 ppm.
Last year's average the following week was around 411.5 ppm. To receive a difference below 3 ppm/year next week a decrease by about 1 ppm or more from this week's values is necessary.
Someone said on ENSO-thread that a Modoki Nino is on. This would probably keep the central Pacific values of CO2 a bit higher than normal, as the surfacing hotter waters exhale gases.

Drowning man will grab at anything they think might float.... to keep the delusion going they aren't drowning and about to die.   

Someone said ... would probably .... a bit higher .... denial and fantasy works like that. But in the end it doesn't work at all.

---

It looks like some people may want some other people to possibly be more certain of the potential scientific issues relating to this thread, than they actually might be, at least without confirming several things concerning the state of the Pacific Ocean, concurrent and historical. This, would sadly require tracking, if I don't make a mistake, at least three scientific papers published during 2005-2009 on which the issue at hand was studied by observations and more or less clearly described. This I'm not going to do. Rather, I should continue to interpret science as I see fit to the readers here, even though it's likely it won't change deeply rooted certifiable opinions.

I find this comment sadly misguided and personally offensive. I am offended by it because it is ad hominem abuse.

1) certifiable opinions means in plain english "insane opinions" and that comment is clearly being directed at myself.

2) It is not an attempt at humour or as a joke - or there would be a smily face somewhere, like ;)

3) Which is what I do all the time when cracking  a"joke"

4) Therefore, logically, the comment should be deleted, a warning given and an in a "perfectly reasonable" world come with an apology.

Part 2

1) By saying: "Drowning man will grab at anything they think might float.... to keep the delusion going they aren't drowning and about to die."  it's a more colourful version of pointing out the common practice of people known as "grasping at straws"

2) Almost anything is "possible" in regard to ENSO dynamics but imho (in my humble option) I am stating by my comments that to link the discussion/comment about "a Modoki Nino is on" is extremely unjustified.

3) Not only is it "uncertain" it is extremely premature to draw any kind of link without substantial evidence that will support such a "possible connection" with MLO CO2 levels today and recent months.

4) Because yes This, would sadly require tracking and that is exactly what must be done first, over on the ENSO thread, and it needs to be done by qualified scientists/institutions first.

5) Because without that it's a "nothing burger" claim unsupported by the science or even any kind of amateur analysis either - "This I'm not going to do" says  Pmt111500

Well then, what you do need to do is, IMHO, is to STFU until you or someone else does do it!

Or go post it on WUWT or some other Unscientific forum/blog.

6) Maybe there is a connection but to even suggest that now is "grasping at straws" without the work being done first.

Part 3

1) Which as the only thing I actually said and meant.

2) I did not personally attack anyone personally but spoke about a common error and flawed thinking that people often fall into.

3) It's a general heads up for everyone - a warning to beware about "such unsubstantiated claims" being made on a supposedly "scientific orientated" forum.

4) Perhaps in a forlorn hope that if we can get a big enough hammer then maybe we can bash that Square peg into the round hole which is CO2 levels at +3.50 ppm growth rates.

5) NON-SEQUITUR - it does not follow - absent any evince that at shows within a 95% confidence level that likely does fit.

6) The issue here is not the SCIENCE, nor is about certifiable opinions about the science or the data - my comment was 100% about the issue of critical thinking skills being applied to the Evidence in the Observations that might exist.

7) I am not specifically arguing against any kind of "science or data" because none has been provided here to argue for or against.

8) At no time did I say anything against any person, nor make any suggestion anyone "should NOT continue to interpret science as I see fit to the readers here"

9) Therefore it should be clear as crystal to any right thinking fair and balanced person that the "back-handed subtle and overt" accusations been directed towards me amount to nothing more than STRAW MAN Fallacies!

10) And by default is extremely offensive as well to me!

For it is not I who is prancing around here with deeply rooted certifiable opinions.

It is obviously, based on the evidence, Pmt111500!

And I am so sick of this IRRATIONAL EMOTIONAL CRAP being thrown at me and so many others on this forum every single day by a MINORITY of only a couple of dozen prolific everyday posters on the ASIF.

And I am also sick of the FLAKY CLIMATE SCIENCE that gets through the Moderator all the time, plus the incessant disordered and disruptive BULLSHIT being spread about Tesla and EVs etc every single day!

I have reported these kinds of disgusting comments to Neven to no avail. He just ignores it.

So maybe it is time that the reasonable majority with a fair and intelligent mind all started reporting these kinds of comments to Neven until his INBOX overflows onto his kitchen floor?

Is it time to actually hold people to account by reporting the crap they post here?

Maybe then something RATIONAL might be done about it ... like LOCKING the garbage threads that exists and get created.  Deleting flaky abusive insulting emotionally driven comments and giving THOSE people warnings, or putting them on moderation instead of me all the time because NEVEN refuse to do his job properly to a point where I cannot take it any more.

There's too such sewerage floating here. Get rid of it. And stop listening to the light weights and PC pussies. 

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2541.msg200361.html#msg200361



NEVEN BS



...........  it won't change deeply rooted certifiable opinions. 

Are you blind Neven .... yes you are .... it's happening every single day all over the place.

Offensive BULLSHIT and make believe fantasies and delusions projected onto other people by the self-righteous!!!

NO ONE said to Pmt111500 that HE MUST STOP ...  "continuing to interpret science as I see fit to the readers here"

That level of misinterpreting distorting failing to COMPUTE a reasonable meaning for WTF someone had just said into an INSANE DISCONNECTED EMOTIONAL OVERREACTION


But his posts will never be DELETED for putting other people down and endlessly telling them not only they are WRONG but "their opinions are CERTIFIABLE!"

IOW he is straight up calling other people INSANE but that's totally acceptable for them to do it!!!
It's going on all the time ... non-stop ... all over this Forum and I am not the one who starts it or speaks like that by default to everyone else!!!

No, it is not acceptable, it is in itself IRRATIONAL aka INSANE that you allow it and harangue people like me who POINT IT OUT and CALL IT OUT for what it is!

Saying anything to you about this CRAP has been a total waste of time and energy for an entire year and I QUIT.

So hurry up and process my outstanding posts so I can get the fuck out of here and go hang out in some nice peaceful respectful humane places instead.

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2541.msg200354.html#msg200354
« Last Edit: May 21, 2019, 05:28:13 PM by Lurk »

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1732
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #143 on: May 20, 2019, 06:21:00 PM »
It looks like some people may want some other people to possibly be more certain of the potential scientific issues relating to this thread, than they actually might be, at least without confirming several things concerning the state of the Pacific Ocean, concurrent and historical. This, would sadly require tracking, if I don't make a mistake, at least three scientific papers published during 2005-2009 on which the issue at hand was studied by observations and more or less clearly described. This I'm not going to do. Rather, I should continue to interpret science as I see fit to the readers here, even though it's likely it won't change deeply rooted certifiable opinions. 
« Last Edit: May 20, 2019, 06:27:08 PM by Pmt111500 »
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1732
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #144 on: May 22, 2019, 09:22:09 PM »
Stephan's message has the previous values https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2541.msg199594.html#msg199594
Currently esrl@noaa reports:
May 21:     Unavailable
May 20:     414.73 ppm
May 19:     414.75 ppm
May 18:     Unavailable
May 17:     415.22 ppm
Last Updated: May 22, 2019

Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2463
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 192
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #145 on: May 22, 2019, 09:38:47 PM »
Reply #143 ("Posted by: ASILurker") was "last edited" by Lurk, and I note his handle is no longer in the Members List.  I take it this means he has sought greener pastures.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1732
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #146 on: May 22, 2019, 09:42:41 PM »
Reply #143 ("Posted by: ASILurker") was "last edited" by Lurk, and I note his handle is no longer in the Members List.  I take it this means he has sought greener pastures.

I noticed the post, yes and it's a bit sad if he done so, he brought some life to the political section here, that's been dominated by non-european discussion. I do not know what his political party is but I've known a couple of hard line european lefties with similar sort of passion. Maybe he gets offended of this too so I better stop. Politics and science do not mix well.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2019, 10:05:31 PM by Pmt111500 »
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1732
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #147 on: May 22, 2019, 10:40:38 PM »
 :-\ :-[  :-X https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/certifiable
Words, always hard. Numbers, sometimes work.
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

Sleepy

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1154
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 118
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #148 on: Today at 04:47:18 AM »
Reply #143 ("Posted by: ASILurker") was "last edited" by Lurk, and I note his handle is no longer in the Members List.  I take it this means he has sought greener pastures.
Yes, he obviously deleted his account. ASILurker was the one he registered with at first. Norwegians, Swedes and Finns are very similar, it's mostly the Finnish language that separates us. 
And oh, it's been a Modoki-like state since October according to Jamstec, I don't post in the ENSO thread anymore but here's an older crosspost from one in the 2018 thread. All the following updates are at the link.

Better late than never, Jamstec:
http://www.jamstec.go.jp/frcgc/research/d1/iod/e/seasonal/outlook.html
Quote
Sep. 25, 2018
Prediction from 1st Sep., 2018

ENSO forecast:
The SINTEX-F continues to predict a moderate-to-strong El Niño event that may emerge in fall and reach its peak in winter. This El Niño is more or less of Modoki-type and we need to be careful of its impact that may be different from that of the canonical El Niño.
Indian Ocean forecast:
As predicted earlier, the positive Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD) has actually emerged during July. In particular, we can see the cold sea surface temperature in the eastern pole clearly. The model predicts the positive IOD to continue during the boreal fall. In accord to the positive IOD evolution, sea level anomalies are expected to be negative (positive) in the eastern (western) tropical Indian Ocean. We may observe co-occurrence of a positive Indian Ocean Dipole and an El Niño/El Niño Modoki-like state in the boreal fall and winter seasons of 2018; this is as we observed in 1994 (with El Niño Modoki) or 1997 and 2015 (with El Niño).

Edit; may I also add that there were signs of an eventual modoki already back in June last year:
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2228.msg158153.html#msg158153
&
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2228.msg167058.html#msg167058

Edit2; on a second thought, I'd better not quote discussions with other members at all, just adding the links above.
« Last Edit: Today at 06:42:55 AM by Sleepy »
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.