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: 31

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

Author Topic: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels  (Read 47272 times)

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 790
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 256
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #50 on: March 06, 2019, 10:47:56 PM »
...

2018 was very close to the El Nino years of 2015 and 2016.

And 2018 was not an El Niño Year...
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

dnem

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 327
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 128
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #51 on: March 07, 2019, 05:33:45 PM »
some nifty charts of atmospheric gases...

https://www.co2levels.org/

The methane graph at that site shows a strong seasonal component but the annual rise is bimodal, peaking in the fall and spring after a small drop in winter.  I could make up some reasons why, but not sure.  Interesting.

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6762
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1672
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #52 on: March 07, 2019, 07:49:44 PM »

The methane graph at that site shows a strong seasonal component but the annual rise is bimodal, peaking in the fall and spring after a small drop in winter.  I could make up some reasons why, but not sure.  Interesting.
I think it is because the Northern hemisphere land area & therefore vegetation is so much greater than the Southern hemisphere

If you wish to revert to your second childhood, as I do (often unwillingly) on many days, then this link is for you...

https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange//kids/documents/carbon-through-the-seasons.pdf

CARBON THROUGH THE SEASONS
Introduction: 60–90 minutes
LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
Students will:
 Learn about the carbon cycle
 Understand how seasonal variations affect global atmospheric CO2 concentrations
 Understand how CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere are changing overall in recent decades
ADAPTED FROM:
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA):
DESCRIPTION
In this lesson plan, students learn about the carbon cycle and understand how concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Earth’s atmosphere vary as the seasons change. Students also learn that even with these seasonal variations, the overall amount of CO2 is increasing in the atmosphere as a result of people’s activities, which are changing the natural carbon cycle.

ps: Those thicko trump commissars trying to wreck the EPA seem to have missed the education pages.
« Last Edit: March 07, 2019, 08:09:37 PM by gerontocrat »
"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)

dnem

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 327
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 128
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #53 on: March 08, 2019, 01:16:25 PM »
No gerontocrat, that's why there is a seasonal up and down in the familiar Mauna Loa CO2 data.

If you look at the CH4 data, it also goes through a seasonal cycle, but it is quite different than the CO2 cycle.  It is lowest in the northern summer, generally bottoming out in July.  It then rises through the fall and hits a first peak in the early winter, then falls slightly during the northern midwinter, rises again in the late winter and early spring, then begins it bigger decent toward the next summer's minimum.  Almost every northern winter show this curious small mid-winter dip.

If I had to guess, it has something to with optimal temperatures for microbial metabolism.  Or maybe gas drilling and associated releases drops off during the cold mid-winter months? Or both? Or something else?

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1297
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 111
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #54 on: March 08, 2019, 07:48:48 PM »
At the global level, the numbers so far this decade are now as below, with an average of 2.41 (vs. 2.02 the previous decade and 1.47 in the 1990s):

However if you take the 7 years starting in 2012, the average is 2.5ppm.  2011 was, I am sure, impacted by the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption with its impact on the stratosphere and air traffic in some of the most heavily travelled routes in the world.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

Ken Feldman

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 812
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 90
  • Likes Given: 102
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #55 on: March 08, 2019, 08:12:25 PM »
No gerontocrat, that's why there is a seasonal up and down in the familiar Mauna Loa CO2 data.

If you look at the CH4 data, it also goes through a seasonal cycle, but it is quite different than the CO2 cycle.  It is lowest in the northern summer, generally bottoming out in July.  It then rises through the fall and hits a first peak in the early winter, then falls slightly during the northern midwinter, rises again in the late winter and early spring, then begins it bigger decent toward the next summer's minimum.  Almost every northern winter show this curious small mid-winter dip.

If I had to guess, it has something to with optimal temperatures for microbial metabolism.  Or maybe gas drilling and associated releases drops off during the cold mid-winter months? Or both? Or something else?

It may be both.  The biggest natural component is wetlands, and tropical wetlands tend to dominate.  It may be tied to the Indian monsoon, rains in Indonesia, and other seasonal effects.

In the US, a large component of the fossil fuel extraction is fracking, and while the biggest fields are in Texas, there is a lot of oil drilling and fracking in the Bakken in Montana and North Dakota that goes through a slowdown due to severe weather in the winter.  There's also a lot of fracking for natural gas in Ohio, Pennsylvania and other northern states that may slow down in winter.  Russia has some large fields in Siberia, so those may also slow down when winter arrives.

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6762
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1672
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #56 on: March 08, 2019, 08:15:25 PM »
No gerontocrat, that's why there is a seasonal up and down in the familiar Mauna Loa CO2 data.

If you look at the CH4 data, it also goes through a seasonal cycle, but it is quite different than the CO2 cycle.  It is lowest in the northern summer, generally bottoming out in July.  It then rises through the fall and hits a first peak in the early winter, then falls slightly during the northern midwinter, rises again in the late winter and early spring, then begins it bigger decent toward the next summer's minimum.  Almost every northern winter show this curious small mid-winter dip.

If I had to guess, it has something to with optimal temperatures for microbial metabolism.  Or maybe gas drilling and associated releases drops off during the cold mid-winter months? Or both? Or something else?
It does seem to be at least partly a N / S hemisphere thing. The "winter" dip is apparently a S Hemisphere summer thing (lost the link but found this one)

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsta.2010.0341
The seasonal cycle is a convolution of seasonal cycles from Northern and Southern
Hemisphere sites driven by seasonality in reaction rates of CH4 with OH and emissions from some
sources (wetlands, rice production and biomass burning), and impacts of meteorology
"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)

Viggy

  • New ice
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #57 on: March 09, 2019, 06:26:28 AM »

If I had to guess, it has something to with optimal temperatures for microbial metabolism.  Or maybe gas drilling and associated releases drops off during the cold mid-winter months? Or both? Or something else?

Throwing my guess in the hat, I would expect it would be related to the decomposition of organic matter in the NH that was buried under snow through fall and winter. This process would be happening over massive areas of land in extremely wet soils (as would be the case in spring) and drop off when summer ramps up.

Just quickly eyeballing it, 2014 spring seems to have one of the larger relative peaks in methane emissions - wouldn't that correlate to the year when NH snow cover had one of its largest extents?

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 790
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 256
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #58 on: March 17, 2019, 10:28:51 PM »
Another week with an increase of more than 3 ppm:
Week beginning on March 10, 2019:     412.16 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:             409.02 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     388.71 ppm
The average increase of the last ten years is 2.35 ppm (which is already an awful lot if you go back 20 or 30 years)
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

Sam

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 134
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 116
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #59 on: March 17, 2019, 10:54:31 PM »
Another week with an increase of more than 3 ppm:
Week beginning on March 10, 2019:     412.16 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:             409.02 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     388.71 ppm
The average increase of the last ten years is 2.35 ppm (which is already an awful lot if you go back 20 or 30 years)

Remember as well that this does not consider the warming from the other warming gases. The total of those combined with global CO2 was estimated as being 526 ppm CO2(e) in 2016.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_equivalent

Add to that the ~6 ppm CO2 rise since then, and the ~2 ppm CO2(e) rise in other warming gases, plus the annual variation to peak from average, and we are approaching peak annual CO2(e) of 540 ppm with average annual CO2(e) of ~ 532 ppm .  We are far above anything environmentally sustainable without catastrophic change for even short time periods. Forget 450 ppm, or even 500 ppm as a cap. We are going to blow through 550 ppm within about 5 years. We will make no significant reductions in that period. To the contrary, based on current trends, we will significantly add to the current emissions through that period. We are now less than 25 years (and possibly less than two decades) from blowing through 600 ppm CO2(e). That appears likely to occur about the years 2040-2042, possibly a bit sooner.

And if the clathrate releases from the arctic ocean accelerate from their current release rates, and/or the tundra releases of CO2 and methane increase, it may be even sooner than that.

My calculations of the forcing's puts us at about 535 ppm CO2(e) global now, and projects crossing 550 and 600 ppm CO2(e) in about the years 2022 and 2032 respectively (without added clathrate or tundra increases).

Sam

wdmn

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 355
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #60 on: March 18, 2019, 01:04:45 AM »
Thanks for the reminder Sam.

I wonder is there a good figure for pre-industrial CO2eq?

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 177
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #61 on: March 18, 2019, 08:01:07 PM »
The calculation of CO2e assumes that the level of atmospheric methane will fall, as each methane molecule degrades in about 14 years. Our reality is that the level of atmospheric methane is increasing, as the degraded methane is being more than constantly replaced with new emissions. Therefore a better view of both current, and ongoing, warming would be the continuous CO2e for methane (about 100 times), rather than the 100 year one (the one used in official estimates - about 38 times) or even the 20 year one (about 86 times).

With this number for methane, the CO2e is well over 610ppm.Taking into account the offsetting effect of aerosols (the UN IPCC does this) we are over 550ppm.

In pre-industrial times there was very little of the non-CO2 gases, so the level of CO2 is a good proxy - about 280ppm. So we have already met the doubling of pre-industrial level of CO2e and are adding about another 5+ppm per year.

The level of aerosols is relatively constant as coal use growth has decelerated since mid decade and there is a lot more effort to scrub aerosols in China, while the atmospheric GHG levels (including methane) keep increasing. The result should be an acceleration in global average temperature increases.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2019, 08:08:24 PM by rboyd »

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 790
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 256
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #62 on: March 18, 2019, 10:37:35 PM »
The calculation of CO2e assumes that the level of atmospheric methane will fall, as each methane molecule degrades in about 14 years. Our reality is that the level of atmospheric methane is increasing, as the degraded methane is being more than constantly replaced with new emissions. [...]
I think this is an important point.
Always scientists come around with the "factor 30", claiming that methane is much shorter-lived than carbon dioxide. But the development of new methane seems to be endless, independent where its sources are exactly.
If one imagines the big "methane time bomb" ticking in N Siberia, N Canada and Alaska in the permafrost soil (and, of course, in the shallow seas of the Arctic Ocean close to Siberia) waiting to be liberated, the total Greenhouse Gas effect on future temperatures is much higher than today. Unfortunately it does not look like mankind is starting to slow down and reverse its CO2 emissions, so this all adds up to a bigger and bigger number...
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

wdmn

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 355
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #63 on: March 18, 2019, 11:11:47 PM »
I don't quite follow you. CO2eq is a discrete measurement. IT shouldn't matter what value you assign to methane as long as you use the same value for both the baseline and current level.

This only matters if you reduce pre-industrial methane to zero, which I don't think should be done.

mitch

  • New ice
  • Posts: 87
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #64 on: March 18, 2019, 11:57:56 PM »
pre-industrial CH4 was about 700 ppb vs about 1800 ppb today:
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/MethaneMatters

One should be able to make a pre-industrial CO2e.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 177
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #65 on: March 19, 2019, 02:37:21 AM »
The only number I have found is 280ppm CO2 for pre-industrial (in the UN IPCC materials), I cannot find a preindustrial CO2e number anywhere. A calculation would also need assumptions on N2O, which was about 270 ppb in 1800.

https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/atmospheric-concentration-of-carbon-dioxide-3#tab-chart_5_filters=%7B%22rowFilters%22%3A%7B%7D%3B%22columnFilters%22%3A%7B%22pre_config_polutant%22%3A%5B%22N2O%20(ppb)%22%5D%7D%7D


Sam

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 134
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 116
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #66 on: March 19, 2019, 03:07:20 AM »
The only number I have found is 280ppm CO2 for pre-industrial (in the UN IPCC materials), I cannot find a preindustrial CO2e number anywhere. A calculation would also need assumptions on N2O, which was about 270 ppb in 1800.

https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/atmospheric-concentration-of-carbon-dioxide-3#tab-chart_5_filters=%7B%22rowFilters%22%3A%7B%7D%3B%22columnFilters%22%3A%7B%22pre_config_polutant%22%3A%5B%22N2O%20(ppb)%22%5D%7D%7D

After a bit of digging, I found the following suggested values:

CO2: 278 ppm
CH4: 722 ppb
Stratospheric Water: ??
N20: 270 ppb
Tropospheric Ozone: 270 ppb
CF4: 10-7 ppt
C2F6: 3.47x10-6 ppt

Using Forcing factors (W/m2/ppb) of:
CO2: 0.014
CH4: 0.037
N2O: 0.12
H2O: 0.011
O3:   0.02
CF4: 0.25
C2F6: 0.09

This results in a total forcing of 3,956 and reverses to a CO2(e) of 282.56 ppm, or 4.56 ppm above the CO2 background level. Stratospheric water may change that a little.  So, about 4.5 ppm above the CO2 level.

The most commonly used methods use a logarithmic ratioing to the preindustrial levels. It is cleaner and likely better not to do it that way.

Worse though is that the reality is so much more complex than the simple methods suggest. The various gases exist in differing quantities at different altitudes, latitudes, and seasons, rather than as a homogeneous picture through the entire column. The IR reflections and refractions occur in differing frequency bands with very complex overlaps. Sun angles, latitude, seasonality, cloud decks and more all play roles. Etc... To actually model all of that would take an extremely sophisticated model and a supercomputer to evaluate. It isn't something we can easily do using computers at home.

Still, the simple models do seem to fairly accurately portray the situation as a smeared average. Do not take the number of digits in the result as significant. The result is only a likely central value, lacking any attempt at an error estimate.

Still, the calculation is instructive.  Where we were at CO2 of about 278 ppm and CO2(e) of about 282.5 ppm.  We are today at about 414 ppm (Mauna Loa today) CO2 and circa 540 ppm CO2(e). That represents increases since pre-industrial of about 136 ppm CO2 and 258 ppm CO2(e).

That is of course - assuming that I haven't blundered badly somewhere in the data or math.  Please check the results before using them. Assuming that I haven't seriously erred in the calculation, that suggests a starkly different consideration of the conditions using the CO2 versus CO2(e) numbers. Using the CO2(e) values, it suggests we will reach a doubling of the background in 8-9 years. Again, please check my math - especially if you have access to better models or approaches to perform the calculation.

Sam


« Last Edit: March 19, 2019, 03:20:30 AM by Sam »

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4531
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 907
  • Likes Given: 1301
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #67 on: March 19, 2019, 10:07:31 AM »
After a bit of digging, I found the following suggested values:

CO2: 278 ppm
CH4: 722 ppb
Stratospheric Water: ??
N20: 270 ppb
Tropospheric Ozone: 270 ppb
CF4: 10-7 ppt
C2F6: 3.47x10-6 ppt

Using Forcing factors (W/m2/ppb) of:
CO2: 0.014
CH4: 0.037
N2O: 0.12
H2O: 0.011
O3:   0.02
CF4: 0.25
C2F6: 0.09

This results in a total forcing of 3,956 and reverses to a CO2(e) of 282.56 ppm, or 4.56 ppm above the CO2 background level. Stratospheric water may change that a little.  So, about 4.5 ppm above the CO2 level.

The most commonly used methods use a logarithmic ratioing to the preindustrial levels. It is cleaner and likely better not to do it that way.
Thanks for the calculation, however your end result does not settle with my intuition. The other gases can't be contributing so little, given that they were quite abundant in the pre-industrial atmosphere as well. If I am not mistaken (this is not my line of expertise, if such even exists) your w/m2/ppb numbers are ppm, not ppb, (or mW, not W) and the number for methane should be 10 times higher. I also have suspicions that the O3 and N2O numbers are much lower than they should be.
(I am looking at the table here and making rough calculations.)

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2545
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #68 on: March 22, 2019, 07:45:32 PM »
Wide range 4.66ppm in 3 days:

March 21:     410.18 ppm
March 20:     412.22 ppm
March 19:     412.97 ppm
March 18:     414.84 ppm
March 17:     411.64 ppm

wolfpack513

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 177
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 18
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #69 on: March 23, 2019, 03:24:17 PM »
Updated NOAA monthly growth rates chart including February 2019. YoY February 2019 was the highest growth rate since January 2017.  12-month running average is quickly racing back to the linear trend. 

I chose January 2006 for the start of this data-set for 2 reasons. 2006-2007 ENSO was similar to our current conditions. The 2007 DJF ONI was +0.7°C.  2019 DJF ONI was +0.8°C.  2006-2007 was also the top of an economic cycle similar to recent global economic conditions.  Though not perfect this limits issues with start and end points.

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 790
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 256
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #70 on: March 24, 2019, 09:55:38 PM »
Very worrisome.
You just need to look at the long term linear trend which increased by about 0.8 ppm/month in the last 12 years. Where will this end??
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6762
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1672
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #71 on: March 25, 2019, 07:15:34 PM »
Very worrisome.
You just need to look at the long term linear trend which increased by about 0.8 ppm/month in the last 12 years. Where will this end??
The conventional wisdom has it that 55% of current CO2 emissions are trapped by the ocean (30%) and land (25%) carbon sinks.

For ease, assume current annual increase in CO2 ppm per annum  is 2.5.

So if the sinks totally collapsed, then at current rates of emissions the theoretical maximum annual increase in CO2 ppm per annum is 5.6, giving just over 7 years to 450 ppm.

A more realistic scenario is perhaps
-the ocean sink gradually reduces - warmth and acidification,
- land sinks decline perhaps more rapidly as desertification, deforestation and agriculture intensify.

In addition, there are large amounts of carbon sequestered as peatland in significant tropical forests being turned into plantations, pasture and arable farmland. There are already examples of tropical forests changing from carbon sinks to carbon emitters.

So even if CO2 emissions are turned around this may be partly offset or even overwhelmed by changes to the natural sinks. On pessimistic days I assume CO2 at 450 ppm in the early 2030s.
"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

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2545
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #72 on: March 26, 2019, 01:04:14 PM »
Very worrisome.
You just need to look at the long term linear trend which increased by about 0.8 ppm/month in the last 12 years. Where will this end??
The conventional wisdom has it that 55% of current CO2 emissions are trapped by the ocean (30%) and land (25%) carbon sinks.

Not 55%?

Gavin Schmidt nasa has recently said the combined co2 sinks = 2GtC/year, therefore current emissions need to drop by 80% (of ~10Gtc/yr) for CO2 ppm growth to stabilse. That's not going to happen. Obviously. I doubt Gavin is out by 25%.

You are assuming that the sinks don't react to emissions. If we cut emissions by say 60% then the sinks don't take up anywhere near as much. To first order, the sinks still take up 55% of the reduced emissions. If that first order rule held completely then we would need to stop 100% of our emissions, but it is only to first order.

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6762
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1672
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #73 on: March 26, 2019, 01:16:01 PM »
Very worrisome.
You just need to look at the long term linear trend which increased by about 0.8 ppm/month in the last 12 years. Where will this end??
The conventional wisdom has it that 55% of current CO2 emissions are trapped by the ocean (30%) and land (25%) carbon sinks.

Not 55%?

Gavin Schmidt nasa has recently said the combined co2 sinks = 2GtC/year, therefore current emissions need to drop by 80% (of ~10Gtc/yr) for CO2 ppm growth to stabilse. That's not going to happen. Obviously. I doubt Gavin is out by 25%.

You are assuming that the sinks don't react to emissions. If we cut emissions by say 60% then the sinks don't take up anywhere near as much. To first order, the sinks still take up 55% of the reduced emissions. If that first order rule held completely then we would need to stop 100% of our emissions, but it is only to first order.
NASA reckoned that 55% of CO2 emissions to date were sunk, but both the WMO and NASA are saying currently the sinks take up about 50% (25% land, 25% oceans). The effect on my back-of-envelope calculation is minor.

IPCC scenarios basically say that to reduce CO2 ppm will require CO2 capture and storage.

I can't find that 2GT of Carbon as the combined CO2 sinks quoted as from Gavin Schmidt.
"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

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 790
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 256
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #74 on: April 02, 2019, 10:21:36 PM »
Week beginning on March 24, 2019:     411.32 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:       409.90 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     389.31 ppm
At least this week has settled down (+ 1.42 ppm/y), due to some lower daily values (they are very scattered, compared to last years) in that week and a relatively high weekly value one year ago. The following week has been lower last year, so one should expect a higher yearly increase next week...
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6762
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1672
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #75 on: April 02, 2019, 10:55:16 PM »

I can't find that 2GT of Carbon as the combined CO2 sinks quoted as from Gavin Schmidt.

Here's one quote with original ref - I slightly misquoted it but you'll notice where easy enough.

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2541.msg187960.html#msg187960
Gavin Schmidt points out that the oceans are taking up 2gt of the total of circa 10gt of carbon emitted per annum (though this seems a little low compared with the 30% and 25% quoted elasewhere ).

He states that as the other land-based sinks are on a 100 year cycle then in the long-term that means the 2gt sunk in the oceans is all the carbon that will be sunk. I think he is not entirely correct. Some forests have a very thin organic layer on the forest floor..i.e. trees grow, then die and decay and their carbon released back to the atmosphere. Using an average tree life of 100 years gives a carbon cycle of 100 years.
BUT
In many tropical (and other) forests the damp and often flooded forest floor swallow and trap all the organic matter including dead trees, building up thick layers that turn into peat over thousands of years. Consider also organic matter built up over the holcocene in the tundra as vast deposits of peaty material.

In other words, much land sinks would continue to be effective in the long-term. Indeed, this makes it doubly scary when, e.g. Malaysia and Indonesia convert rainforest into palm-oil plantations. A carbon sink is converted into a carbon emitter. The same applies to the peat deposits under the rainforests of the Congo, and if the Amazon forest dries up..... and if the tundra.......

So, Mr. Schmidt, in my view you are wrong in both your statement on the potential of land-based carbon sinks, and on the potential of land-based sinks to become serious carbon emitters.

Apologies for getting so off-topic.
"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)

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1473
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 138
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #76 on: April 02, 2019, 11:52:05 PM »
I don't think a discussion about the time Carbon spends in the various sinks is off topic.
Of the 25% to 30% that goes into the ocean carbon sink  only .2GT goes into the sediment sink where it can remain for millions of years. All the rest of the carbon that goes into the ocean will at some point return to the surface as DIC ( dissolved inorganic carbon ) where it can return to the atmosphere when gas partial pressure differences support ocean to atmosphere transfer.
 Terrestrial soil sinks vary in the amount of time they can sink carbon. Crop lands have lost much of their carbon because tillage and drying allow stored carbon to oxidize. Forests are better but even a hundred years isn't great . Peat formation and tundra offer long term sinks but how much of the terrestrial sink is taken up by peat each year is probably a small portion of the annual sink.
 A thorough understanding of the time Carbon spends in the various sinks is critical to any discussion of how me might engineer our way out of this mess. It is one of the reasons I have for doubting carbon farming plans that don't quantify the amount of time we can expect soil carbon to stay put. If trees are better at storing carbon in some locations but not others then replanting and protecting forests in some areas is more important than a plan to simply grow trees.
 

wdmn

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 355
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #77 on: April 12, 2019, 07:43:17 AM »

I wish people would look more carefully and see what's there, then they would stop using mystifications like "mother nature," particularly when discussing science.

Viggy

  • New ice
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #78 on: April 12, 2019, 12:28:20 PM »
btw iirc, that single ≥ 3.5 ppm vote was by me. I might end up wrong on that obviously but we'll see huh?  :)

Sorry bud, that one >3.5 ppm vote was by my pessimistic ass!

FishOutofWater

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 745
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 280
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #79 on: April 12, 2019, 03:49:43 PM »
It's a weak El Niño that started in the September, October, November period according to the U.S. CPC. This El Niño will probably be at Australian BoM minimum levels also but it's a close call by Australian rules. This El Niño has affected CO2 levels and not in a good way.

https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/lanina/enso_evolution-status-fcsts-web.pdf

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 790
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 256
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #80 on: April 12, 2019, 06:27:57 PM »
Week beginning on March 24, 2019:     411.32 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:        409.90 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     389.31 ppm
At least this week has settled down (+ 1.42 ppm/y), due to some lower daily values (they are very scattered, compared to last years) in that week and a relatively high weekly value one year ago. The following week has been lower last year, so one should expect a higher yearly increase next week...
...and there it is:
Week beginning on March 31, 2019:      412.21 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:        409.15 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     389.13 ppm

Return to > 3 ppm/year last week.
Last year the next week was around 409.5. The latest values are again more than 3 ppm higher.
How long will this be going on?
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3105
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 400
  • Likes Given: 198
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #81 on: April 12, 2019, 08:22:12 PM »
btw iirc, that single ≥ 3.5 ppm vote was by me. I might end up wrong on that obviously but we'll see huh?  :)
Sorry bud, that one >3.5 ppm vote was by my pessimistic ass!
Apologies, thanks for clarification. It was what I was thinking maybe I missed the bus to vote on time.  Seems more credible an option now than it looked in January. :)
Has Lurk just admitted to lying?  I suppose a screen-shot image of the poll can be Photoshopped, but how one voted is pretty obvious, given that row is highlighted.
Edit:  see post below.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2019, 09:03:28 PM by Tor Bejnar »
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

b_lumenkraft

  • Guest
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #82 on: April 12, 2019, 08:35:25 PM »
I read it as an admission of making a mistake.

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3105
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 400
  • Likes Given: 198
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #83 on: April 12, 2019, 09:08:22 PM »
Thank you B_,
Lurk does write, "iirc" which frequently means 'If I Recall Correctly.'  Why one would base a post on recollection when the evidence is in the very thread (at the top) is beyond me!
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

b_lumenkraft

  • Guest
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #84 on: April 12, 2019, 09:21:00 PM »
Easy to explain mate. :)

They didn't vote, so it's not highlighted for them as it is for us who voted.

ASILurker

  • Guest
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #85 on: April 12, 2019, 11:45:18 PM »
Easy to explain mate. :)

They didn't vote, so it's not highlighted for them as it is for us who voted.

I think not only is my memory going screwy, I'm going blind too!

My vote is highlighted as 3.0 - 3.4 ppm

Doh Homer~!

Do I need to post a screen shot to prove it, or could my word be good enough? Probably not by many accounts.  Oh well. Give a dog a bad name, and it sticks. (shrug)

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6762
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1672
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #86 on: April 13, 2019, 11:50:31 AM »

BOM has definitely not called an "el nino" so far, no atmospheric coupling at all. Moderate Oceans SSTs anomalies do meet a typical weak el nino thresholds, but nothing else does. The late very heavy flooding in Australia monsoon doesn't fit. western pacific doesn't fit, Indonesia seas weather doesn't fit and northern Australian weather doesn't fit in April either (yet) iirc the reports over the last 3 months at least.

It's now the 13th April and I am wondering where MLO data is for March.

The ENSO stuff is on the ENSO 2019 thread within the consequences topic. The US analysis for March came out on April 11th.
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2539.msg195130.html#msg195130

I am sure I have seen references as to how global warming is weakening or breaking down what were regarded as the reliable relationships between weather and climate events, e.g. the impact of an El Nino (especially a weak one) might be being weakened or reversed by effects of climate change elsewhere on the planet. And no, I cannot quote chapter and verse on this.
"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)

ASILurker

  • Guest
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #87 on: April 13, 2019, 04:50:01 PM »
Thx G. but I was chasing the March CO2 numbers from MLO.

They finally came through today.

Recent Monthly Average Mauna Loa CO2
March 2019:        411.97 ppm + 2.56 ppm
March 2018:        409.41 ppm
Last updated: April 12, 2019 (no they weren't?)

A quick monthly growth summary shows

Oct  2.37
Nov 2.90
Dec 2.26
Jan 2.87
Feb 3.43
Mar 2.56

A rough 6 months avg of +2.73 ppm - moderately above average by ~0.33 ppm (?).
YTD 2019 + 2.95 - well above recent 2010s avg. by ~0.55 ppm

But there has been some quite wild swings along the way. Like right now - the last 6 days for this coming week's avg for MLO CO2 is  + 3.50 ppm. Pushing April Growth to date close to being + 3.30 ppm YoY - back to February levels again.

The increase over February of March's avg CO2 is the smallest of the last several years.
See the graph here
 

The annual peak in May is only 4 weeks away now.

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 790
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 256
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #88 on: April 14, 2019, 10:09:44 PM »
And once again, even higher:
Week beginning on April 7, 2019:     413.13 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:       409.46 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     389.50 ppm
This is an increase of more than 3.6 ppm/year.
Next week it will look a bit better because last year it was around 411 ppm. But the value of today (414.1 ppm) is even 3 ppm higher than that, and one of the highest CO2 concentrations ever recorded since measurements began more than 60 years ago. Where will this end?
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

Shared Humanity

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3977
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 429
  • Likes Given: 50
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #89 on: April 14, 2019, 10:59:11 PM »
Where will this end?

This, of course, depends on whether we take effective actions to curb emissions. My guess? Between 600 and 800 ppm.

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 790
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 256
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #90 on: April 15, 2019, 06:46:07 PM »
Where will this end?

This, of course, depends on whether we take effective actions to curb emissions. My guess? Between 600 and 800 ppm.

+500 ppm by 2050 at least (imho)
which simply means an average increase of 3 ppm/year for the next 31 years [to reach 500 ppm]. This is probably too low/too optimistic if we follow the RCP 8.5 path...
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 177
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #91 on: April 15, 2019, 10:45:19 PM »
Its greenhouse gases as a whole that cause climate change, not just CO2. On that count using CO2e100 numbers we are already increasing at 4-5ppm/year (at about 498ppm in 2018 so we will hit the doubling of pre-industrial levels in about 12 years - 2030). If we use perhaps a more appropriate CO2e20 for methane, well above that (600ppm+ now and conservatively increasing by 100ppm every 15 years); unless we cut meat consumption and stop increasing the use of natural gas.

The other problem is increases in the carbon cycle kicking in as feedbacks (wetlands, peat bog fires, forest fires, permafrost, lakes ...), so that we could cut anthropogenic emissions and find that we are not reducing the trajectory of climate change. In addition of course we have Bolsonaro helping his buddies to clear the Amazon to grow soybeans and graze cattle, and Trump gutting any regulation related to combating climate change he can find (at last until 2020 if not beyond).

I will be stunned if we aren't into full discussions of implementing geoengineering by 2025 at the latest given the trajectory that we are on. That's without a "Blue Ocean Event" of course.

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 177
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #92 on: April 15, 2019, 10:58:40 PM »
2018 increase in global atmospheric methane levels

NOAA's preliminary figures are for a rise of 10.99ppb in 2018, quite a jump from the 6.89ppb last year. Biggest jump since 2014. Will give the CO2e increase for the year quite a boost.

Anything to do with Trump watering down the fugitive methane regulations Obama put in place, together with the large jumps in US fracked oil production in 2018? There must be a lot of methane floating above Texas.

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends_ch4/

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=38992

And US oil production is still surging....

US expects record domestic oil production in 2019, 2020

https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/us-expects-record-domestic-oil-production-2019-2020-61023486

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 177
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #93 on: April 16, 2019, 04:45:08 AM »
Probably, but do you recall or find which IPCC report iteration (esp. AR5) had the RCP 8.5 hitting 500 ppm CO2 by 2050? I don't recall one off hand.

AR5

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full_wcover.pdf

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 177
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #94 on: April 16, 2019, 09:20:37 PM »
Its greenhouse gases as a whole that cause climate change, not just CO2.

Yes of course, that's correct. And also very relevant to overall warming especially going forward.

But as a much more closely monitored and therefore more consistent oft reported proxy for success/failure, CO2 is an excellent superior guide to monitor, and so this thread (I imagine)

CH4 emissions are tracked monthly by NOAA, and with the 20-year impact being 100 times that of CO2, the combination of tracking the two gives a much better view of whats happening. The acceleration in CO2 is bad enough, I absolutely agree, the addition of increasing levels of CH4 makes it go from bad to worse. Also matches better to the acceleration in temperature changes.

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends_ch4/

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 790
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 256
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #95 on: April 16, 2019, 09:50:15 PM »
Probably, but do you recall or find which IPCC report iteration (esp. AR5) had the RCP 8.5 hitting 500 ppm CO2 by 2050? I don't recall one off hand.

AR5

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full_wcover.pdf
Could you please give a page number or a chapter title of this IPCC report where the projections of CO2 concentration from today until 2100 are plotted (or listed) under the different RCP scenarios?
Thanks Stephan
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

Stephan

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 790
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 256
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #96 on: April 16, 2019, 10:40:22 PM »
Probably, but do you recall or find which IPCC report iteration (esp. AR5) had the RCP 8.5 hitting 500 ppm CO2 by 2050? I don't recall one off hand.

AR5

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full_wcover.pdf
Could you please give a page number or a chapter title of this IPCC report where the projections of CO2 concentration from today until 2100 are plotted (or listed) under the different RCP scenarios?
Thanks Stephan
I found it. It is on page 74. And 2050 will have around 500 ppm CO2 as expected with an annual growth of ca. 3 ppm from now on (see postings above).
It is too late just to be concerned about Climate Change

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 177
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #97 on: April 17, 2019, 10:06:39 PM »
Lurk,

We certainly seem to share the same realistic/pessimistic view of things. As the shit truly starts to hit the fan I see increasingly desperate attempts at geo-engineering etc. but most probably too late as the Earth systems take back control from the humans. The Anthropocene may turn out to be a very short era.

At least the Mauna Loa numbers are taken directly from the atmosphere, rather than the anthropogenic emission numbers that are open to so much possible error and manipulation to be meaningless for identifying trends over a relevant time horizon. I have pretty much given up on those and just watch the atmospheric concentration numbers, the policy makers should be doing the same.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1186
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 177
  • Likes Given: 44
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #98 on: April 17, 2019, 11:54:50 PM »
Thawing Permafrost Emitting Higher Levels of Potent Greenhouse Gas Than Previously Thought: Study

I had assumed that N20 atmospheric concentrations would stay on the same straight line increase that they have been on for decades, and certainly did not thinks permafrost thaw would change this. Seems every day I learn something new, and it tends not to be something good! N20 is 300 times worse than CO2 and lasts in the atmosphere for over 100 years.

Quote
N2O "has conventionally been assumed to have minimal emissions in permafrost regions," the report said, citing research published in the 1990s.

But the new study's findings challenge that assumption.

A team of researchers, led by Harvard University scientists, used a small plane to measure greenhouse gas levels over 120 square miles of thawing permafrost in the North Slope of Alaska. They found that in just one month of 2013, emissions of nitrous oxide in the region reached what was previously believed to be the yearly total.

"This revelation could mean that the Arctic—and our global climate—are in more danger than we thought," explained a statement from Harvard

Quote
What is clear, though, is that "much smaller increases in nitrous oxide would entail the same kind of climate change that a large plume of CO2 would cause," Wilkerson said.

The team's findings align with other recent studies that have relied on chambers—or "covered, pie plate-sized containers planted into tundra"—or the extraction of cylindrical "cores" from the permafrost to measure greenhouses gases, according to Harvard's statement.

The new study, said Wilkerson, "makes those findings quite a bit more serious."

The findings also bolster experts' previous warnings that policymakers around the world aren't adequately considering the impacts of permafrost thaw in their plans—based on the goals of the Paris climate agreement—to cut down planet-heating emissions and prevent climate catastrophe.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/04/16/thawing-permafrost-emitting-higher-levels-potent-greenhouse-gas-previously-thought

Bernard

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 105
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« Reply #99 on: April 18, 2019, 05:11:46 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.