Arctic Sea Ice : Forum

AGW in general => Science => Topic started by: crandles on January 09, 2018, 04:34:51 PM

Title: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on January 09, 2018, 04:34:51 PM
It is intended that this thread can be used for general discussion of CO2 levels.

However may as well have a poll question while setting it up.

Airborne fraction is CO2 increase in atmosphere / emissions of CO2.

Data from
http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/17/data.htm
leading to
https://github.com/openclimatedata/global-carbon-budget/blob/master/data/global-carbon-budget.csv
is shown below and will continue to be used if available.


Year   Fossil-Fuel-And-Industry   Land-Use-Change-Emissions   Atmospheric-Growth   Ocean-Sink   Land-Sink   Budget-Imbalance   Airborne fraction
Code: [Select]
1959    2.454 1.774 2.035 0.772 0.982 0.439
1960 2.569 1.644 1.505 0.783 1.811 0.113
1961 2.58 1.574 1.654 0.65 1.024 0.827
1962 2.686 1.529 1.187 0.748 1.619 0.661
1963 2.833 1.473 1.208 0.878 1.029 1.19
1964 2.995 1.42 1.039 1.061 1.843 0.472
1965 3.13 1.373 2.332 1.181 0.49 0.499
1966 3.288 1.329 2.332 1.189 1.404 -0.308 0.367
1967 3.393 1.306 1.293 0.997 1.882 0.527
1968 3.566 1.303 2.099 1.038 2.587 -0.855
1969 3.78 1.31 2.798 1.072 0.67 0.55
1970 4.053 1.276 2.396 1.01 0.687 1.236
1971 4.208 1.24 1.548 1.088 2.648 0.165 0.398
1972 4.376 1.204 3.116 1.311 1.25 -0.097
1973 4.614 1.177 3.095 1.302 2.032 -0.638
1974 4.623 1.137 1.442 1.249 4.481 -1.411
1975 4.596 1.106 2.608 1.263 2.753 -0.923
1976 4.864 1.088 2.056 1.337 3.178 -0.619 0.428
1977 5.016 1.064 4.07 1.375 1.802 -1.167
1978 5.074 1.028 2.735 1.433 3.145 -1.211
1979 5.357 1.001 4.537 1.287 1.56 -1.026
1980 5.301 1.04 3.625 1.569 0.768 0.379
1981 5.138 1.05 2.438 1.6 2.696 -0.546 0.560
1982 5.094 1.062 2.12 1.655 1.603 0.778
1983 5.075 1.104 3.901 1.81 0.326 0.142
1984 5.258 1.14 2.629 1.719 2.902 -0.852
1985 5.417 1.158 3.456 1.714 2.728 -1.323
1986 5.583 1.195 2.205 1.749 2.27 0.554 0.446
1987 5.725 1.232 5.703 1.748 0.473 -0.966
1988 5.936 1.249 4.749 1.715 2.192 -1.47
1989 6.066 1.276 2.926 1.725 3.666 -0.976
1990 6.065 1.278 2.502 1.79 2.353 0.697
1991 6.133 1.292 1.526 1.869 2.095 1.935 0.480
1992 6.072 1.309 1.484 2.07 2.256 1.572
1993 6.063 1.311 2.586 2.017 3.08 -0.309
1994 6.168 1.308 3.562 1.904 1.566 0.444
1995 6.3 1.294 4.134 1.85 1.868 -0.257
1996 6.442 1.269 2.268 1.815 3.409 0.219 0.374
1997 6.549 1.744 4.198 1.869 3.018 -0.792
1998 6.568 1.192 5.936 2.056 1.654 -1.886
1999 6.554 1.166 2.841 1.957 3.577 -0.654
2000 6.725 1.28 2.629 1.866 3.986 -0.476
2001 6.886 1.147 3.901 1.731 2.354 0.047 0.490
2002 6.986 1.307 5.046 2.036 0.88 0.331
2003 7.368 1.357 4.791 2.124 2.491 -0.682
2004 7.734 1.297 3.286 2.039 3.755 -0.049
2005 8.033 1.181 5.173 2.083 2.037 -0.079
2006 8.324 1.225 3.752 2.191 3.362 0.243 0.492
2007 8.491 1.049 4.431 2.258 3.176 -0.325
2008 8.766 1.102 3.752 2.179 3.994 -0.057
2009 8.689 1.519 3.434 2.214 3.095 1.465
2010 9.121 1.373 5.173 2.165 3.043 0.113
2011 9.495 1.32 3.54 2.332 3.98 0.964 0.399
2012 9.667 1.379 5.067 2.382 2.083 1.514
2013 9.765 1.409 5.173 2.416 3.198 0.386
2014 9.848 1.379 4.219 2.51 3.658 0.84
2015 9.831 1.519 6.233 2.57 1.498 1.048
2016 9.875 1.27 6.127 2.61 2.727 -0.318 0.479

Probably could get better airborne fraction data by smoothing for ENSO effects but I am not sure I am up to doing that competently.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-global-co2-emissions-set-to-rise-2-percent-in-2017-following-three-year-plateau

says

Quote
Over the past three years, global CO2 emissions from fossil fuels have remained relatively flat. However, early estimates from the Global Carbon Project (GCP) using preliminary data suggest that this is likely to change in 2017 with global emissions set to grow by around 2%, albeit with some uncertainties.

Hopes that global emissions had peaked during the past three years were likely premature. However, GCP researchers say that global emissions are unlikely to return to the high growth rates seen during the 2000s. They argue that it is more likely that emissions over the next few years will plateau or only grow slightly, as countries implement their commitments under the Paris Agreement.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: A-Team on January 09, 2018, 05:16:57 PM
So this is a ratio of Mauna Loa observed vs honor system claims of progress and/or bottom-up model guesswork on emission sources and sinks? Many countries seemed incentivized to show progress when in fact they are stationary or regressing.

Mauna Loa is worsening faster and faster each year, but that's not quite the bottom line because rising methane, NOx and other greenhouse gases have pushed the real number today close to 500. That is the number that Arctic permafrost and other runaway feedbacks are seeing.

Where are livestock? They are huge sources when the whole ag production chain is figured in.

Where are non-revegatable forest wildfires (permanent loss of sinks), under land use change like conversion of rainforest to cow pasture and palm oil plantations?
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on January 09, 2018, 06:01:32 PM
Are those your only objections?  ;)

Quote
Where are livestock?
Are they dealt with as 'land sink'? (I don't see photosynthesis either so presume land sink covers both these and more (decay etc))
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 09, 2018, 06:59:48 PM
Possibly the attached image is of only tangential relevance to this thread but it indicates that NASA believes that total instantaneous radiative forcing, IRF, used in the CMIP5 projections was over +3 W/sq-m


Title: "Forcings in GISS Climate Models"
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/modelforce/

Caption for image: "Fig. Instantaneous radiative forcing at the tropopause (W/m2) in the E2-R NINT ensemble. (a) Individual forcings and (b) Total forcing, along with the separate sums of natural (solar, volcanic and orbital) and anthropogenic forcings. (Updated: 3/12/2016)"
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on January 09, 2018, 07:29:34 PM
I think the wording needs changing on options 3 & 4 from

- to rise at steady rate
to
- at existing levels

 Emissions continue to rise at increased rate, airborne fraction increases
 Emissions continue to rise at increased rate, airborne fraction no noticeable change
 Emissions continue to rise at steady rate , airborne fraction increases
 Emissions continue to rise at steady rate , airborne fraction no noticeable change
 Emissions continue but at declining rate, airborne fraction increases
 Emissions continue but at declining rate, airborne fraction no noticeable change

Then one has to decide what one means by emissions- one's directly from human activity only - i.e. excluding livestock, permafrost etc etc etc,
or everything ?

Going to extremes, if the sinks failed entirely, the rise in CO2 could only be a maximum of about 5 ppm per annum from direct human activities on existing levels of emissions.

If there is a real burp in release of carbon from other sources - e.g. Amazon forest fires, Indonesian peat fires, permafrost melt etc etc, the airborne fraction could be effectively negative, and even more likely to be negative if man-made emissions from fossil fuels were substantially reduced.

One can see a nice little doomsday model emerging, and CO2e from methane etc not even included.

ps My vote is for fossil fuel emissions to go down, but airborne fraction to increase substantially (decline in sinks plus release of carbon from other sources), but not Armageddon by 2028 (though closer than comfortable).

ps:- A nice article on how Australia fiddles its emissions data (x-ref to A-Team's comments on the honor system in emissions data).

https://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2018/jan/09/australias-emissions-are-rising-its-time-for-this-government-to-quick-pretending
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on January 10, 2018, 12:02:36 AM
Changed options 3 and 4 to 'rise steadily at approx existing rate'

Hope that is OK.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 10, 2018, 04:45:32 PM
As a follow-on about crandles' values about 'Budget-Imbalance', in addition to non-fossil fuel net carbon emissions (including agriculture, increasing natural carbon emissions and decreasing natural carbon sinks), we should all be aware that changes in cloud cover and non-carbon slow response feedback mechanisms mean that Effective Radiative Forcing is progressively increasing from what was assumed in AR5.  For example established 'budgets' typically assume that ECS is close to 3C, while Brown & Caldeira (2017) [see the first image] have shown that due to changes in cloud cover ECS is currently at least 3.7C which implies about 25% higher effective radiative forcing for a given values of CO2e (which per NOAA with the GWP100 of methane of about 25 is about 500ppm or if one uses a GWP100 for methane of about 38 this value is closer to 525ppm); so the effective CO2e should be between 620ppm and 650ppm.

However, Friedrich et al (2017) [see the second image] provides data that indicate that ECS may increase to about 4.5C with ice-climate feedback that might occur in coming decades that could increase the effective CO2e up to 750ppm to 790ppm as compared to established 'budgets'.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Csnavywx on January 15, 2018, 07:53:31 PM
Now that 2017's figures are in (although a first prelim estimate). +2.13 after a double dip Nina and full post-Super Nino recovery. Pretty damn bad. For instance, the Nina/post-Nino recovery/reabsorption after the '98 Nino lowered 1999's increase to just 0.98ppm. We saw nowhere near that kind of recovery this time.

2000-2009 averaged 1.97 ppmv/yr. 2010-2017 has managed 2.40 ppmv/yr. 21% increase so far this decade. We've got a couple more years to go, but I doubt it moves much from that figure.

I'm of the opinion that we'll see increased belching of CO2 from land sources with each successive Nino or even longer duration warm-neutral conditions due to baseline conditions now exceeding where we would historically be. The 6ppm we accumulated over those two Nino years along with the lackluster recovery is probably a warning sign. Future Ninos may very well follow that behavior and lead to an increased frequency of years where the net land sink is effectively zero or negative. We also have the Arctic that will likely soon turn from carbon sink into source (if it isn't getting close already).

Once that land sink is consistently removed, the problem becomes much worse, of course.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 16, 2018, 01:32:56 AM
Csnavywx,

Thanks for the excellent post. 

Models indicate that the frequents of extreme El Nino events should double as we approach 1.5C (GMSTA above pre-industrial).

Best,
ASLR
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 22, 2018, 10:45:49 PM
People seem to enjoy the attached presentation of cumulative weekly NOAA atmospheric CO2 concentrations for Mauna Loa thru the week of Jan 14 to Jan 20, 2018:
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Pmt111500 on January 23, 2018, 05:32:01 AM
People seem to enjoy the attached presentation of cumulative weekly NOAA atmospheric CO2 concentrations for Mauna Loa thru the week of Jan 14 to Jan 20, 2018:
*considers taking a stock exchange chart of past 10 years and mutilating proportions of Mona Lisa according to that*
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on January 30, 2018, 01:55:45 PM
Not long to add your vote if you want to.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 30, 2018, 06:47:44 PM
Not long to add your vote if you want to.

As time is running out to cast a vote, I provide the most recent weekly values for atmospheric CO2 concentrations at Mauna Loa thru the week ending Jan 27, 2018:
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: silkman on March 09, 2018, 10:35:14 PM
The Keeling Curve just hit 410 ppm for the first time in 2018:
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Bernard on March 14, 2018, 10:57:46 AM
Today back down (408.36).

One thing I've been wondering for a while is what causes such quite abrupt daily variations. Has it something to do with local meteorology, passage of fronts? It's quite obvious that different air masses have different CO2 concentrations, and passage of a front can show up in data. That said, I'm not very familiar with Hawaii meteorology.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Pmt111500 on March 14, 2018, 11:24:05 AM
Today back down (408.36).

One thing I've been wondering for a while is what causes such quite abrupt daily variations. Has it something to do with local meteorology, passage of fronts? It's quite obvious that different air masses have different CO2 concentrations, and passage of a front can show up in data. That said, I'm not very familiar with Hawaii meteorology.

Neither am I. I remember reading the description of what is an acceptable record from the Mauna Loa instruments, long ago.

What they of course monitor is the volcano itself, any activity there may end the reliable measurements at the station. They track the wind to see where any volcanic plumes of co2 go and try to get only those measurents during which wind blows from the sea. Then there are the local traffic rush hours that can be seen in the record in some wind conditions. This, I believe is pretty much impossible to totally deduct from the background levels. It might be these 2ppm swings are solely because of traffic and unfavorable winds, but what you say of fronts is also true. Various air masses have various amounts of co2 in them. Could be the 410 ppm was from northern winds and 408 was of tropical origin (plant activity). In time ( half a year, I'd say) the air masses mix up so the difference in co2 levels in various air masses never exceeds certain boundaries.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Wipneus on March 22, 2018, 03:29:10 PM
UK's Met Office has released its annual forecast of the rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration for the coming year.

https://blog.metoffice.gov.uk/2018/03/22/la-nina-cools-2018-co%e2%82%82-forecast-but-it-will-remain-close-to-a-record-year/

Quote
(...)in 2018 the rise is predicted to be smaller than in the last two years due to the temporary effects of climate variability on natural carbon sinks – locations which can absorb more carbon than they release.

The La Niña event has involved a temporary cooling of ocean temperatures in the eastern Pacific Ocean and shifts in weather patterns around the globe, especially in the tropics. Generally cooler, wetter conditions in many places cause enhanced vegetation growth, drawing down more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than usual.

(...)

The monthly average concentration is forecast to reach 412.2±0.6 ppm in May before dropping back down to 405.8 ± 0.6 ppm in September.

(https://metofficenews.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/co2-graph-at-mauna-loa.jpg)

Forecast CO₂ concentrations at Mauna Loa over 2018 (orange), along with previous forecast concentrations for 2016 (blue) and 2017 (green) and Scripps Institute measurements (black).
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 03, 2018, 05:03:46 PM
Per the attached plot, the atmospheric CO2 concentrations at Mauna Loa at the end of March 2018, where essentially at the mid-May levels in 2017:
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: TerryM on April 03, 2018, 06:58:03 PM
Per the attached plot, the atmospheric CO2 concentrations at Mauna Loa at the end of March 2018, where essentially at the mid-May levels in 2017:
Best graph ever to show the continuous increase year after year after year.
Terry
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Shared Humanity on April 03, 2018, 08:04:14 PM
I'm so old I remember when we were talking about when we would break the 400 ppm barrier.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: oren on April 03, 2018, 11:34:27 PM
For a (weak) La Nina year the CO2 YoY rise in that graph is quite ominous.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Tor Bejnar on April 04, 2018, 02:42:40 PM
Looking at the graph AbruptSLR posted, it appears that despite the (ominous) year-on-year (YOY) increase, all the previous years shown have the current date's value higher than (or about equal to) the previous year's peak.  This year's value is definitely not higher than last year's peak. 

For those who know more than what I know, does this mean anything?
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: bosbas on April 20, 2018, 11:30:59 PM
Not much news this week so far.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Csnavywx on April 21, 2018, 12:16:34 AM
Looking at the graph AbruptSLR posted, it appears that despite the (ominous) year-on-year (YOY) increase, all the previous years shown have the current date's value higher than (or about equal to) the previous year's peak.  This year's value is definitely not higher than last year's peak. 

For those who know more than what I know, does this mean anything?

That's to be expected with a moderate double dip Nina and post-Nino plant recovery, although the recovery has been rather anemic (see post 98 Nino drawdown for instance).
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on April 21, 2018, 11:25:57 AM
Not much news this week so far.

I go to the Scripps Institution of Oceanography for the data at :-
https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/

There is a range of graphs to look at.

Sometimes there is a few days delay.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: silkman on April 22, 2018, 09:39:06 PM
Scripps CO2 moves into new record territory with a month or so to go to the 2018 peak
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 23, 2018, 05:08:16 PM
Scripps CO2 moves into new record territory with a month or so to go to the 2018 peak

For the week ending April 21 2018, the weekly Mauna Loa atmospheric CO2 concentrations were 411.07ppm:
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Tor Bejnar on April 23, 2018, 05:21:27 PM
Two years ago, the CO2 peak occurred this week.  Other years, it appears from the graph, had their peak during the next 6 weeks.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on April 23, 2018, 05:58:41 PM
Scripps CO2 moves into new record territory with a month or so to go to the 2018 peak

For the week ending April 21 2018, the weekly Mauna Loa atmospheric CO2 concentrations were 411.07ppm:
Hullo AbruptSLR,

I love that graph.

What a gif that graph of yours would make. Imagine having it update month by month one second  at a time with a bell tolling in time at each second as a background for a talk on the reality of AGW.

I admit I liked even more the one with Mount Fiji in the background being gradually drowned in a sea of CO2.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 25, 2018, 01:39:04 AM
I admit I liked even more the one with Mount Fiji in the background being gradually drowned in a sea of CO2.

Hopefully, this image is more to your liking ;)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 25, 2018, 02:10:17 PM
412.37 parts per million (ppm) #CO2 in the atmosphere on April 23, 2018  HIGHEST DAILY AVERAGE REPORTED SO FAR IN 2018 AT MAUNA LOA
https://twitter.com/CO2_earth/status/988811276242403329

https://www.co2.earth/daily-co2
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on April 25, 2018, 04:05:09 PM
I admit I liked even more the one with Mount Fiji in the background being gradually drowned in a sea of CO2.

Hopefully, this image is more to your liking ;)

2018 could be the last year with at least the peak of Mount Fuji above the waves.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on April 26, 2018, 08:50:02 AM
I admit I liked even more the one with Mount Fiji in the background being gradually drowned in a sea of CO2.

Hopefully, this image is more to your liking ;)

Hullo AbruptSLR,

Remember I wrote how your graph would look so super as an animation?

Robertscribbler's latest offering includes Atmospheric CO2 accumulation since 2007 as depicted by this animation of Mauna Loa Observatory CO2 measurements by Robbie Andrew, of the CICERO Center for International Climate Research.

Coincidence? I still think the Mount Fuji one is the classiest.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on April 26, 2018, 10:54:11 AM
412.37 parts per million (ppm) #CO2 in the atmosphere on April 23, 2018  HIGHEST DAILY AVERAGE REPORTED SO FAR IN 2018 AT MAUNA LOA
https://twitter.com/CO2_earth/status/988811276242403329

https://www.co2.earth/daily-co2

It is quite a thing to look at that measurement knowing that it is the highest level of CO2 ppm for at least 800,000 years.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: josh-j on April 27, 2018, 11:51:29 PM
It is quite a thing to look at that measurement knowing that it is the highest level of CO2 ppm for at least 800,000 years.

Very true - and it's no abstract thing either, being in each breath we take.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 28, 2018, 12:21:22 AM
412.37 parts per million (ppm) #CO2 in the atmosphere on April 23, 2018  HIGHEST DAILY AVERAGE REPORTED SO FAR IN 2018 AT MAUNA LOA
https://twitter.com/CO2_earth/status/988811276242403329

https://www.co2.earth/daily-co2

It is quite a thing to look at that measurement knowing that it is the highest level of CO2 ppm for at least 800,000 years.
Per the attached plot the last time we exceeding 412.37ppm CO2 concentrations was over 3 million years ago; and the last time that we exceeded our current CO2e level as about 20 million years ago :(
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on April 28, 2018, 12:31:27 AM
or about a year ago  ;) :P 

(https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/webdata/ccgg/trends/co2_weekly_mlo.png)

412.58412.63 26th April 2017

Yeah ok, 411.07 for a weekly number does look highest.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Shared Humanity on April 28, 2018, 04:49:12 PM
 ::)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 28, 2018, 07:58:30 PM
or about a year ago  ;) :P 
412.63 26th April 2017

Yeah ok, 411.07 for a weekly number does look highest.

While you are correct, you raise a distinction without a difference.  It will be interesting to see what the peak daily and weekly numbers are for the month of May :P
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Pmt111500 on April 28, 2018, 08:12:26 PM
Yeah yeah, betcha some eruption sequence with favourable winds have produced daily, maybe weekly values of higher irrelevance  ::) ;) 8) :o ;D
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Juan C. García on May 03, 2018, 09:54:22 PM
Earth’s atmosphere just crossed another troubling climate change threshold

Quote
For the first time since humans have been monitoring, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide have exceeded 410 parts per million averaged across an entire month, a threshold that pushes the planet ever closer to warming beyond levels that scientists and the international community have deemed “safe.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/05/03/earths-atmosphere-just-crossed-another-troubling-climate-change-threshold/?utm_term=.8a40d0ec6c0f&wpisrc=nl_green&wpmm=1 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/05/03/earths-atmosphere-just-crossed-another-troubling-climate-change-threshold/?utm_term=.8a40d0ec6c0f&wpisrc=nl_green&wpmm=1)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on May 06, 2018, 04:53:11 PM
Quote
Week beginning on April 29, 2018:     409.71 ppm
Weekly value from 1 year ago:     409.02 ppm
Weekly value from 10 years ago:     387.20 ppm

Low increase over year for the weekly value only up 0.69, and barely more than May 2017 record monthly value of 409.65, but a few missing values in the last week and I doubt this will last long if at all.

(Perhaps I should also say April 2017 will beat the monthly record when announced in next few days and the global data will show 3rd consecutive month of record values when Feb is announced, even if this is normal at this time of year.)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on May 07, 2018, 12:51:42 PM
Something is clearly wrong with products at ESRL during the last month. Is there other co2 stations that produce recent 2018 data for CO2 readings for their stations with archived historical records for comparison like at  Mauna Loa on ESRL? I have searched already with no luck so far. thanks

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/dv/iadv/
Provides a choice of sites

eg Tutuila, American Samoa
(https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/dv/iadv/graphs/ccgg.SMO.co2.1.none.discrete.2016.2018.png)

(bit further south than Mauna Loa probably altering the pattern a little)

April 2017 saw swings from under 407 to over 412.6 so I am not sure that last month isn't reasonably normal. (Err well 6 consecutive day gap without any values is not normal but swings in values don't seem untypical for time of year.)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Pmt111500 on May 07, 2018, 01:47:54 PM
Let us remember the quake, 6,9 was it? No doubt this may have influenced the readings at least during the 6 omitted days. The pre-quake rise may have been partly due this, though, like cradles says, swings at this level are not unforeseen in previous years. Could be worth looking into other gases of volcanic origin, what I've heard the quake was due major rearrangement of lava/magma under Mauna Loa.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on May 07, 2018, 02:56:02 PM
Quake was May 4th
Eruption: 2 May 2018 news was saying: "A Hawaiian volcano could be set to erupt after hundreds of earthquakes and the collapse of a crater floor."
Also presumably later "Hundreds of residents were told to flee as lava eruptions occurred at the Big Island volcano."

No readings on or since May 4th.

No idea if readings before quake and eruption might be affected. Nor if May 3rd reading of 409.23 might be affected. Seems quite low while volcanos' do give off CO2 so maybe not affected?
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: NevB on May 07, 2018, 03:18:31 PM
Something is clearly wrong with products at ESRL during the last month. Is there other co2 stations that produce recent 2018 data for CO2 readings for their stations with archived historical records for comparison like at  Mauna Loa on ESRL? I have searched already with no luck so far. thanks

There was cape grim in Tasmania Australia though the latest I see stops abruptly in 2016 as I believe we in Aus decided that this is of no particular importance (or could be an embarrassment to the people that direct funding) and it's better to focus our research on commercial opportunities. Please leave any replies in the swearing thread where I may reply after I have finished banging my head on the table.

https://agage.mit.edu/stations/cape-grim
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Pmt111500 on May 07, 2018, 03:26:43 PM
Oh, it was only three and five days days ago?  Anyway, it could be better to switch over to some other site for the duration of the eruption. No doubt the winds may clear the site of any extra co2, but nonetheless the quality of data isn't possibly as good as normal.
Besides the crew there is likely busy with the volcanic gas measurements so it may be a while the site is out of regular observations. They have some guards as to which measurements are acceptable wrt winds in these situations, but the size of the geological stuff going on there may render these obsolete.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: mitch on May 07, 2018, 06:09:40 PM
Here is another site to get GHG time series:
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/dv/iadv/index.php?code=brw

Northern hemisphere has higher CO2 and methane because of the fossil fuel source. The southern hemisphere lags by about a year because of the time it takes air parcels to work across the equator. 
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: JimD on May 08, 2018, 12:59:48 AM
I've mentioned many times that to get emissions under control you have to shut down the global tourism industry.  Here is why...

Quote
Domestic and international tourism account for eight percent of greenhouse gas emissions, four times more than previously estimated, according to a study published Monday.
The multi-trillion dollar industry's carbon footprint is expanding rapidly, driven in large part by demand for energy-intensive air travel, researchers reported in the journal Nature Climate Change.

"Tourism is set to grow faster than many other economic sectors," with revenue projected to swell by four percent annually through 2025, noted lead-author Arunima Malik, a researcher at The University of Sydney's business school...

...As in decades past, the United States is the single largest emitter of tourism-related carbon emissions, with other wealthy nations -- Germany, Canada and Britain -- also in the top ten.

But emerging economies with burgeoning middle classes have moved up the ranking, with China in second place and India, Mexico and Brazil 4th, 5th and 6th, respectively....

...The total number of air passengers is expected to almost double by 2036 to 7.8 billion per year, according to the International Air Transport Association (IATA).

7.8 billion is a scary number. Those are not going to be electric planes.

http://www.spacedaily.com/afp/180507150126.yqljztgb.html
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: JimD on May 08, 2018, 01:02:26 AM
Forgot this part from the article above.

Quote
...Neither tourism nor aviation are currently covered by the 2015 Paris climate treaty, which calls for capping global warming at "well below" two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit),...

I have trouble thinking that was anything but great industry lobbying. I wonder what other business segments were conveniently left out?
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Csnavywx on May 09, 2018, 10:44:34 PM
CO2 values at Mauna Loa are unlikely to be affected by the volcano unless the plume can breach the subtropical inversion that typically sets up there. The fast fluctuations are likely due to weather (a longwave trough axis recently passed over the station during the drop and could have easily entrained some lower CO2 air down over the station).
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: JimD on May 11, 2018, 01:19:06 AM
Quote
Trump White House axes Nasa research into greenhouse gas cuts

The Carbon Monitoring System (CMS), a $10m (£7m)-a-year project which remotely tracks the world's flow of carbon dioxide, is to lose funding.

Science magazine reports that its loss jeopardises the ability to measure national emission cuts - as agreed to by nations in the Paris climate deal.


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44067797
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 12, 2018, 07:15:39 PM
Kees van der Leun.  https://twitter.com/Sustainable2050/status/995056062016483328

“Since I was born, CO2 at Mauna Loa crossed:
320 ppm in May 1960
330 in May 1972
340 March 1980
350 May 1986
360 May 1993
370 April 1999
380 April 2004
390 May 2009
400 April 2014
and 410 ppm in April 2018
I apologize for any inconvenience caused.”

“Years it took us to drive up CO2 by 10 ppm:
320 → 330:  12
330 → 340:   8
340 → 350:   6
350 → 360:   7
360 → 370:   6
370 → 380:   5
380 → 390:  5
390 → 400:  5
400 → 410:  4
That’s making the climate crisis worse faster.”


Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: TerryM on May 13, 2018, 01:14:11 AM
We not only haven't stopped it's growth, we haven't even slowed it's acceleration.


If we added CH4 to the chart it could get scary. :-\


Bob mentioned on another thread that we just needed to speed up what we're doing to curb emissions.
I think we've got to slow down, way down.


40 MPH on the freeway, 20 everywhere else.
Ground all of the planes.
No new cars, trucks, or ships.
It may not turn us around, but it might stop the acceleration.


Drastic measures are called for.
Terry
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Sleepy on May 13, 2018, 07:44:42 AM
Doing less is not that drastic, Terry.
During my puny stay on this one and only human habitat in the universe, humanity has taken some seriously drastic measures to ramp up CO2 ~100ppm. Either we fix that ourselves or evolution will fix it for us.

Planet Earth has a nasty way to deal with nuisances.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: TeaPotty on May 13, 2018, 03:36:27 PM
We not only haven't stopped it's growth, we haven't even slowed it's acceleration.


If we added CH4 to the chart it could get scary. :-\

Good to see more people saying this, because I've felt alone repeating it for years. We havent done anything to cut CO2 emissions significantly enough to fight climate change.

The climate movement keeps getting used for purposes other than fighting climate change. The movement spent years caught up pointlessly arguing with deniers, abstaining from politics while publishing articles promising false hope, and even protesting Trump like he caused this problem.

I love hearing this comedy about how horrible Conservative parties are destroying all the non-existent progress of Liberal parties. There was also a good joke a few years back claiming that actual emissions paused, even though CO2 emissions didnt.

Now that CH4 emissions are accelerating along with CO2, this show is starting get interesting. How much longer can people keep lying to themselves that things will be alright?
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 13, 2018, 04:40:48 PM
We not only haven't stopped it's growth, we haven't even slowed it's acceleration.


If we added CH4 to the chart it could get scary. :-\


Bob mentioned on another thread that we just needed to speed up what we're doing to curb emissions.
I think we've got to slow down, way down.


40 MPH on the freeway, 20 everywhere else.
Ground all of the planes.
No new cars, trucks, or ships.
It may not turn us around, but it might stop the acceleration.


Drastic measures are called for.
Terry

I will say again, we simply cannot rely on market mechanisms to get us where we need to be. We need a Marshall Plan, a planet wide commitment to transition away from fossil fuels and it needs to be completed in 2 decades.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: TerryM on May 13, 2018, 05:23:48 PM
I will say again, we simply cannot rely on market mechanisms to get us where we need to be. We need a Marshall Plan, a planet wide commitment to transition away from fossil fuels and it needs to be completed in 2 decades.
Isn't this just another way of saying that we're just waiting for the fat lady to sing a dirge for the death of civilization?


A Marshall Plan actually requires some tin star marshall to come blazing into town with all of his brothers, rooting out and shooting up every evil doer in the territory. Who is going to tell both Dangerous Donald and Vicious Vlad that they not only have to holster their nukes, they've got to hand them over to the New Marshall in Town?
Who has the moral authority to tell China and India to stop moving their poor into the middle class? Who can tell tropical people and desert dwellers that they must turn off the air conditioning in the baby's room?
Waiting for a Marshal to appear, and putting any hope in any Plan he might envision is like waiting for Godot, if he exists, he's got pressing business somewhere else.


We couldn't agree on the shape of the table where Peace in Vietnam would be negotiated. Slavery exists almost 200 years after Britain abolished it. New coal plants are coming on line, and newer ones are on the drawing board.


Two decades is the blink of an eye.
Terry
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Tunnelforce9 on May 13, 2018, 07:57:33 PM
Cement is another huge problem, at the moment CO2 emissions from cement production in China is more then India's CO2 emissions from fossil fuel.


https://carboncounter.wordpress.com/2015/06/06/building-china-the-role-of-cement-in-chinas-rapid-development/
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 14, 2018, 03:52:02 PM
I will say again, we simply cannot rely on market mechanisms to get us where we need to be. We need a Marshall Plan, a planet wide commitment to transition away from fossil fuels and it needs to be completed in 2 decades.
Isn't this just another way of saying that we're just waiting for the fat lady to sing a dirge for the death of civilization?


A Marshall Plan actually requires some tin star marshall to come blazing into town with all of his brothers, rooting out and shooting up every evil doer in the territory. Who is going to tell both Dangerous Donald and Vicious Vlad that they not only have to holster their nukes, they've got to hand them over to the New Marshall in Town?
Who has the moral authority to tell China and India to stop moving their poor into the middle class? Who can tell tropical people and desert dwellers that they must turn off the air conditioning in the baby's room?
Waiting for a Marshal to appear, and putting any hope in any Plan he might envision is like waiting for Godot, if he exists, he's got pressing business somewhere else.


We couldn't agree on the shape of the table where Peace in Vietnam would be negotiated. Slavery exists almost 200 years after Britain abolished it. New coal plants are coming on line, and newer ones are on the drawing board.


Two decades is the blink of an eye.
Terry

The U.S. rebuilding Europe using the Marshall Plan did not undermine Democracies. It strengthened them. If the rebuilding of Europe had been left to market forces, it would have taken decades.

If we are worried about autocratic states, let the unfolding disaster deliver unbelievable pain and suffering without any advance prep. A dying population will not resist a police state. It will welcome it.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on May 17, 2018, 03:31:30 PM
April 2018:       410.26 ppm

Record high monthly value and first over 410.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 17, 2018, 04:38:48 PM
How did this discussion develop on this CO2 thread?


A personal lack of discipline on my part.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on May 17, 2018, 04:58:11 PM
May 14:      412.45 ppm

Probably a record daily reading at MLO

Did that a little up thread:
412.63 26th April 2017
still retains record.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Shared Humanity on June 02, 2018, 03:40:28 PM
Nice general analysis of greenhouse gas emissions. No new ground here but a good graph rich read.

https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: AbruptSLR on June 02, 2018, 08:17:34 PM
While I believe that the linked data errs on the side of least drama, this NOAA data indicates that for the year 2017: CO2eq = 493ppm & AGGI =1.41.

Title: "THE NOAA ANNUAL GREENHOUSE GAS INDEX (AGGI), Updated Spring 2018"

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on June 07, 2018, 02:00:10 PM
Peak month CO2 at Mauna Loa:

Quote
May 2018:       411.25 ppm
May 2017:       409.65 ppm

Up 1.6 ppm
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Shared Humanity on June 18, 2018, 03:39:37 PM
An exponential growth in atmospheric CO2 that parallels the development of the industrial revolution.

https://www.ducksters.com/history/us_1800s/timeline_industrial_revolution.php

1. A graph of world energy consumption.
2. A graph of early industrial Great Britain.
3. A graph of world population growth.
4. A graph of sea level changes.

Not a coincidence that each have a pronounced exponential behavior.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on June 19, 2018, 07:55:28 AM
El Niños always have an impact on the year-over-year CO2 rate so it's already baked in to the longterm regressions.  An annual growth rate of 2.0 ppm is wishful thinking unless we change course fast.  Tamino shows the current growth rate is closer to 2.25 PPM and accelerating.  There will be non El Nino +3.0 PPM years before too long.

https://tamino.wordpress.com/2018/01/20/is-co2-still-accelerating/ (https://tamino.wordpress.com/2018/01/20/is-co2-still-accelerating/)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on June 19, 2018, 01:15:21 PM
.......
Until I see significant sustainable change in Fossil Fuel use and the economy wide drivers of AGW then my answer to the Poll above;

By 2023-2028 period, what will happen to emissions and airborne fraction?

Cannot be anything other than: 1. Emissions continue to rise at increased rate, airborne fraction increases

For the period 2018 to 2023, I would have to agree with emissions continue to rise at increased rate. Airborne fraction and later 2023-2028 period seems much less clear to me.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on June 28, 2018, 09:52:35 AM
Was curious what the year-over-year change for every month looks like rather than 1 single point per year.  Red line is running 12-month average.  Just did last 10 years but that includes several of Niños and Niñas.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on July 12, 2018, 08:00:09 AM
June 2018 came in at 410.79.  Nearly a 2 PPM year-over-year change.  The 12-month running smooth should be bottoming out soon with Niño firing up.  It took until ~October 2015 before YoY changes started to jump.  However, that was a multi year Niño which makes it different than previous events.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Csnavywx on July 13, 2018, 04:05:02 PM
April global reading is in:

April 2018:        408.96 ppm
April 2017:        406.33 ppm

+2.63ppm -- still running ahead of 2017's increase, which is a bit surprising. I expected there to be more braking action from the Nina at this point, like Mauna Loa had, but the other stations aren't really showing it:

(https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/webdata/ccgg/trends/global_trend.png)

2010s continue their streak of coming in well above 2ppm, with the exception of the 2011 "Super Nina" year, which featured a very cold trop. Pacific year-round and a strong rebound effect from the 2010 Nino. The rebound effect this time around has been tepid, even with colder basin-wide temps this year:

2010   2.44   (+/-)0.06
2011   1.69   0.09
2012   2.38   0.09
2013   2.42   0.09
2014   2.04   0.09
2015   2.93   0.09
2016   2.85   0.09
2017   2.21   0.09

Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: rboyd on July 22, 2018, 10:45:47 PM
"+2.63ppm -- still running ahead of 2017's increase, which is a bit surprising. I expected there to be more braking action from the Nina at this point, like Mauna Loa had, but the other stations aren't really showing it"

Mauna Loa is right in the middle of the Pacific, so perhaps it picks up the Nina/Nino effects quicker than other monitoring sites, not a climate scientist but that seems logical to me. Takes time for global mixing to occur.

With emissions continuing to increase (China up 4% y-o-y in Q1 2018), the rate of change in the atmospheric concentrations can only continue to increase. We havn't even stabilized the rate of increase in the amount of CO2, let alone stabilize the actual amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. Such an incredible disconnection between the politicians (even the 'climate believers') and the geophysics.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on August 08, 2018, 03:22:50 AM
July came in at 408.71 ppm at Mauna Loa.  That's a 1.64 ppm year-over-year change or growth rate.  The running 12-month average is also around the lowest growth rate since 2012.  I expect this to bottom soon as we head deeper into warm ENSO or El Niño.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: magnamentis on August 08, 2018, 08:41:31 PM
July came in at 408.71 ppm at Mauna Loa.  That's a 1.64 ppm year-over-year change or growth rate.  The running 12-month average is also around the lowest growth rate since 2012.  I expect this to bottom soon as we head deeper into warm ENSO or El Niño.

what could be the impact of the near by volcano eruptions, as far as i know they release significant amounts of CO2.

while the trend is obvious i just wonder whether there is an impact and if so, how big that would be?
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on August 08, 2018, 10:15:06 PM
July came in at 408.71 ppm at Mauna Loa.  That's a 1.64 ppm year-over-year change or growth rate.  The running 12-month average is also around the lowest growth rate since 2012.  I expect this to bottom soon as we head deeper into warm ENSO or El Niño.

what could be the impact of the near by volcano eruptions, as far as i know they release significant amounts of CO2.

while the trend is obvious i just wonder whether there is an impact and if so, how big that would be?

I believe that when the wind is blowing from the volcano towards the observatory they shut observations down.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: jacksmith4tx on August 08, 2018, 11:07:25 PM
There are several CO2 monitoring stations but Mauna-Loa has the longest record.

Volcano's release lots of different gases and CO2 is probably one of the least toxic (by volume).
This is what the Hawaii volcano emissions looks like.
Sentinel-5P Tracking Emissions from Hawaii’s Kīlauea Volcano
https://www.gislounge.com/sentinel-5p-tracking-emissions-hawaiis-kilauea-volcano/

Everyone knows the oxygen levels are dropping while CO2 is rising.
http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/

Looks like some kind of correlation. Where is the oxygen going? It's not going into the ocean because it's dropping too.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on August 08, 2018, 11:32:59 PM

Everyone knows the oxygen levels are dropping while CO2 is rising.
http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/

Looks like some kind of correlation. Where is the oxygen going? It's not going into the ocean because it's dropping too.

From your own link
Quote
Oxygen levels are decreasing globally due to fossil-fuel burning.

O2 + C => CO2
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: jacksmith4tx on August 08, 2018, 11:38:07 PM
No no no. CO2 is plant food and the planet is greening... So more plants = more oxygen so there can't be less oxygen!!

I'm pulling your leg. It's a common climate change denier argument.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: magnamentis on August 09, 2018, 01:39:04 AM
July came in at 408.71 ppm at Mauna Loa.  That's a 1.64 ppm year-over-year change or growth rate.  The running 12-month average is also around the lowest growth rate since 2012.  I expect this to bottom soon as we head deeper into warm ENSO or El Niño.

what could be the impact of the near by volcano eruptions, as far as i know they release significant amounts of CO2.

while the trend is obvious i just wonder whether there is an impact and if so, how big that would be?

I believe that when the wind is blowing from the volcano towards the observatory they shut observations down.

THX makes totally sense ;)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on August 09, 2018, 06:44:29 AM
As others have mentioned this data is quality controlled.  Mauna Loa is 11,000 ft up and mostly protected from the mixing layer which keeps most volcanic emissions out of it.  Globally with some exceptions CO2 is well mixed.   So quick and abrupt changes in concentration are thrown out because it's not representative of a global well mixed measurement.

July came in at 408.71 ppm at Mauna Loa.  That's a 1.64 ppm year-over-year change or growth rate.  The running 12-month average is also around the lowest growth rate since 2012.  I expect this to bottom soon as we head deeper into warm ENSO or El Niño.

what could be the impact of the near by volcano eruptions, as far as i know they release significant amounts of CO2.

while the trend is obvious i just wonder whether there is an impact and if so, how big that would be?
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Pmt111500 on August 09, 2018, 07:04:52 AM
As others have mentioned this data is quality controlled.  Mauna Loa is 11,000 ft up and mostly protected from the mixing layer which keeps most volcanic emissions out of it.  Globally with some exceptions CO2 is well mixed.   So quick and abrupt changes in concentration are thrown out because it's not representative of a global well mixed measurement.

July came in at 408.71 ppm at Mauna Loa.  That's a 1.64 ppm year-over-year change or growth rate.  The running 12-month average is also around the lowest growth rate since 2012.  I expect this to bottom soon as we head deeper into warm ENSO or El Niño.

what could be the impact of the near by volcano eruptions, as far as i know they release significant amounts of CO2.

while the trend is obvious i just wonder whether there is an impact and if so, how big that would be?
i understood the records not incorporated to the Mauna Loa record needed to be some 4-sigma or other ridiculous amount off from general trends. They're not thrown out of course but just not included. Probably someone up there uses these as validation method for the trends too. It is pretty easy to mess with the numbers, f.e. set up a similar instrument near by and park a running gas guzzler beside it to see how much the numbers change. In finnish military I gathered some air samples (partly for acid rain, partly for ghgs) during winter time, there wasn't any validation done during the winter, though, the measurement station was on otherwise unused, but foot-patrolled area about a mile away from harbor and regularly used roads, so I guess that wasn't necessary back then. Nice to see they've continued and expanded the measurements and changed to an automated system... (my section of the graph would be in the early 1990s, and having way less dates of measurements (not shown)) http://ilmatieteenlaitos.fi/kasvihuonekaasujen-pitoisuudet
Cool to see the effect of weather on the amounts nowadays, air masses from different directions have a measurable difference on CO2/other ghg levels, but this is way less variance than f.e. in relative humidity. Even the daily cycle of plant/algae activity can be sometimes seen :-)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Pmt111500 on August 09, 2018, 10:33:11 AM
What else, carbon monoxide concentrations have been falling a bit every year, my guess this is for energy efficiency standards, cleaner burn produces less CO, and anyway much of it gets oxidated by low level ozone or other procesess. Methane is erratic as ever with it's peaks, though most is from snow covered wintertime when the soil bacteria can still function. I've not seen detailed analysis of various methane peaks though.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Csnavywx on August 30, 2018, 03:38:42 PM
May global CO2 is +2.6ppm over last year. Recent readings at Mauna Loa have shown a slowdown in losses over the past several weeks, causing the global/ML differential to close up. ML is running at +2.4ppm on the last weekly.

We are about 3-4 weeks from the minimum. Last year's low point was the last week of Sept and bottomed out at about 402.7 on the weeklies. Will be interesting to see if we stay above 405 this year.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: mostly_lurking on August 30, 2018, 04:20:02 PM
No no no. CO2 is plant food and the planet is greening... So more plants = more oxygen so there can't be less oxygen!!

I'm pulling your leg. It's a common climate change denier argument.

The more greening part is correct though.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: jacksmith4tx on August 30, 2018, 05:00:39 PM
No no no. CO2 is plant food and the planet is greening... So more plants = more oxygen so there can't be less oxygen!!

I'm pulling your leg. It's a common climate change denier argument.

The more greening part is correct though.
We sure are seeing a lot of green algae so that's a good thing. I hope we can double the size and number of dead zones if we can just pump a few more gigatons of CO2 into the oceans.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Ned W on August 30, 2018, 05:19:57 PM
It's not just algae.  "Global greening" is a real thing, even if it's also gleefully misused in propaganda by deniers (I've spent way too much time on another forum arguing about this).

From the NY Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/30/science/climate-change-plants-global-greening.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/30/science/climate-change-plants-global-greening.html)

The Arctic is also both greening and "shrubifying" at a rapid pace, mostly due to warmth rather than CO2:

https://www.arctictoday.com/shrubification-mean-arctic/ (https://www.arctictoday.com/shrubification-mean-arctic/)

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-studies-details-of-a-greening-arctic  (https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-studies-details-of-a-greening-arctic)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: mostly_lurking on August 30, 2018, 05:31:58 PM
No no no. CO2 is plant food and the planet is greening... So more plants = more oxygen so there can't be less oxygen!!

I'm pulling your leg. It's a common climate change denier argument.

The more greening part is correct though.


We sure are seeing a lot of green algae so that's a good thing. I hope we can double the size and number of dead zones if we can just pump a few more gigatons of CO2 into the oceans.

Algae growth is more due to pollution of the waterways and not CO2. Why look only at the negative side of things? The greening of the world is a positive thing.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: jacksmith4tx on August 30, 2018, 06:20:01 PM
https://cosmosmagazine.com/geoscience/a-phytoplankton-vortex-in-the-baltic-sea

(https://cosmos-images1.imgix.net/file/spina/photo/16196/PlanktonVortex.jpg?ixlib=rails-2.1.4&auto=format&ch=Width%2CDPR&fit=max&w=1800)

Quote
28 August 2018
In recent years, the proliferation of algae blooms in the Baltic Sea has led to the regular appearance of “dead zones” in the basin. Phytoplankton and cyanobacteria consume the abundant nutrients in the Baltic—fueled in part by past and current runoff from sewage and agriculture—and reproduce in such vast numbers that their growth and decay deplete the oxygen content of the water. According to researchers from Finland’s University of Turku, the dead zone this year is estimated to span about 70,000 square kilometres.

A research team from Finland and Germany reported this month that oxygen levels in recent years in the Baltic Sea are at their lowest levels in the past 1500 years. More frequent and massive blooms, combined with warming seas due to climate change, are making it harder for fish and other marine life to thrive in this basin.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Brigantine on August 31, 2018, 12:00:43 AM
Recent readings at Mauna Loa have shown a slowdown in losses over the past several weeks.
The Kilauea eruption has stopped for the past several weeks.

Well, not completely stopped. There was still a lava lake in Leilani and lava entering the ocean until recently, but the lava river down to Kapoho dried up several weeks ago.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Csnavywx on September 04, 2018, 03:10:39 AM
Recent readings at Mauna Loa have shown a slowdown in losses over the past several weeks.
The Kilauea eruption has stopped for the past several weeks.

Well, not completely stopped. There was still a lava lake in Leilani and lava entering the ocean until recently, but the lava river down to Kapoho dried up several weeks ago.

This theory of volcano emissions affecting measurements at Mauna Loa has cropped up several times in this thread. However, due to the persistent tropical trade wind inversion that is nearly always present, volcano emissions rarely make it to the altitude of the monitoring station. The inversion resists upward vertical motion, making it so that only more significant explosive eruptions on the flanks can cause gasses to penetrate to higher altitudes.

At any rate, adjustments are made for any local outgassing that can make it to the observing station on the north slope of the mountain.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on September 06, 2018, 06:02:24 AM
August came in at 406.99 ppm.  1.92 ppm year-over-year change.  The running 12-month growth rate is at its lowest level since 2012.  Rates didn't take off until ~October 2015 so impacts from ENSO are still a month or 2 away.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Pmt111500 on September 06, 2018, 08:45:34 AM
Thanks wolfpack513  for the update.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on September 08, 2018, 04:56:53 PM
Recent Daily Average Mauna Loa CO2
September 07:     403.97 ppm

Will it remain as a valid data point and will it be the lowest reading since Nov 2017 and last as that for a long time?

We are about 3-4 weeks from the minimum. Last year's low point was the last week of Sept and bottomed out at about 402.7 on the weeklies. Will be interesting to see if we stay above 405 this year.

Was this on daily, weekly or monthly basis?

No for daily seems likely, if not already established. Likely yes for monthly and the question was presumably really about weekly which seems an open question.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on September 18, 2018, 09:30:13 PM
Early bottom this year?  The last weekly(9th-15th) was 405.39 ppm.  A few days from now may give us a better idea. 
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on September 18, 2018, 11:02:09 PM
Early bottom this year?  The last weekly(9th-15th) was 405.39 ppm.  A few days from now may give us a better idea.
Scripps has slightly different values. I like that they have a variety of graphs for different time spans. Same possibility though, Goodbye < 405 ppm minimum (weekly and monthly?)
https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on September 25, 2018, 03:33:18 AM
Mauna Loa weekly CO2 value came in at 405.69 ppm.   Up 2.53 ppm from this week last year.  It is also higher than the last 2 weeks so it's possible that we hit our annual minimum.  Still too early to know.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: DrTskoul on September 25, 2018, 12:54:01 PM
Minimum is more likely reached than not...

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/weekly.html
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on September 28, 2018, 01:29:24 AM
Minimum is more likely reached than not...

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

First 4 days of this week average 405.50 ppm.  Lower than last week but higher than the minimum.  Of course the last 3 days could change this but I agree, minimum likely reached.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Sleepy on September 29, 2018, 06:52:00 AM
Thanks for the laugh, I needed it.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on October 02, 2018, 01:37:04 AM
Mauna Loa September increase more than 2ppm. Latest weekly increase year to year looks more like 3 ppm.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on October 02, 2018, 07:32:13 AM
**Edited with official data**

September officially came in at 405.51 ppm.  My estimate was off by .01 ppm.  Year-over-year change of 2.13 ppm.  First time the growth rate has been above 2 ppm since March.  Likely the bottom and soon to be the start of a new upswing.  An October value of 406 ppm brings the running 12-month(red) up.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on October 07, 2018, 10:41:37 PM
New weekly value of 405.50 ppm.  Down from the week before but higher than the minimum 405.39 ppm 3 weeks ago.  Also up 2.49 ppm from this week last year.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on October 24, 2018, 07:52:21 PM
October is going to finish above 406 ppm.  October 2017 was 403.63 ppm.  Should be the highest YoY change in more than 12 months.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on October 28, 2018, 09:04:29 PM
Last week was up 2.58 ppm year over year.   Big upswing the last 4 weeks. 
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on November 02, 2018, 05:56:19 AM
I calculated 406.10 ppm for October.  That's a year-over-year change 2.47 ppm.  That's the highest monthly growth rate since August 2017.  Pretty clear we've passed the cyclical bottom(typically ENSO related).  I will update graph when official numbers come down.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Rod on November 02, 2018, 06:12:53 AM
Thank you wolfpack!  I really appreciate all the work you put into keeping us informed on these numbers, and your graphs are very helpful.   
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on November 03, 2018, 06:48:26 PM
I had a look at the Scripps Mauna Loa graph and maybe the Scripps calculation for October is going to be higher than Wolfpack's. But the real message from Wolfpack's graph is that rather than climate change being tackled by the world, CO2 ppm increase is accelerating, and the so-called Carbon Budget remaining to avoid the 2 degrees increase is depleting at an accelerating rate.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: silkman on November 04, 2018, 10:12:21 AM
It's the Keeling Curve full record that tells this story best. Continuous acceleration of growth, not a sign of a downturn during the 2008 crash and no visible impact of Paris.



Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on November 05, 2018, 12:01:57 AM
I should label my chart better.  I use NOAA data so a little different from Scripps.  Acceleration is the reason why made the chart.  I picked the start date based on ENSO, didn’t think about the 2008 recession.  May move the start to 2006.  It matches ENSO and was nearly the peak of the economic bull market. 
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: silkman on November 05, 2018, 11:35:16 AM
These posts have set me thinking about the size of the challenge we face in, first stopping the acceleration in the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere and then reducing it to sustainable levels.

Just pause a moment to consider the immense size of the global industrial endeavour that developed after the Second World War (I was born in 1946 so this is my lifetime). For massively valid humanitarian reasons and initiated by the Marshall Plan, the US led the Western World to economic recovery. This was followed later by SE Asian countries, this time led by Japan, as they drove their own economies by developing the skills to supply the material goods the West felt it needed. With both the Far East and the West heavily dependent on carbon-based energy, much of it supplied by the Middle East, both the atmosphere and the environment inevitably suffered.

The end result, at the big picture level at least, was one of positive progress economically with better standards of living and longer life expectancy - all this at the cost, unknown to the vast majority, of destruction of the natural environment and silent "geo-engineering" of the planet by changing a critical element of the makeup of our atmosphere.

China, under Mao, was slow to this party but in the last two decades it has clearly taken the lead in completing global industrialisation.  In the post war boom years big parts of the world were on the outside looking in, including Northern and Central Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, both of which were increasingly and legitimately threatening to destabilise the existing status quo.

Enter President Xi with his "One Belt One Road" initiative that is clearly the 21st Century equivalent of the Marshall Plan - massive infrastructure investment by China in Northern Asia and Africa to enable them to drive economic growth and at the same time enhance Chinese wealth and influence in the same way the Marshall Plan did for the US in the last Century.

I haven't included Russia in this "brain dump" but it's pretty clear that, understandably sore about the economic success of the other two global powers (US and China), it is unlikely to take a climate friendly approach to the future.

So where does this leave those of us who believe that this silent, stealthy, seeming innocuous change in our atmosphere is the single biggest challenge facing humanity?

The answer is clear. The real and present danger of climate change is scarcely on the radar screen in the context of the tectonics of the global economy and the challenge we face is enormous. To reverse the acceleration of the Keeling Curve, let alone reduce CO2 to sustainable levels, will require a mobilisation of the world economy on the scale that created the problem in the first place but without the short term economic benefits delivered over the last 75 years at the cost of our environment.

It requires altruism, a long term vision and the sort of global leadership that we currently totally lack and I do fear for the futures of my six grandchildren.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: oren on November 05, 2018, 12:03:11 PM
These posts have set me thinking about the size of the challenge we face in, first stopping the acceleration in the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere and then reducing it to sustainable levels.
...
The answer is clear. The real and present danger of climate change is scarcely on the radar screen in the context of the tectonics of the global economy and the challenge we face is enormous. To reverse the acceleration of the Keeling Curve, let alone reduce CO2 to sustainable levels, will require a mobilisation of the world economy on the scale that created the problem in the first place but without the short term economic benefits delivered over the last 75 years at the cost of our environment.

It requires altruism, a long term vision and the sort of global leadership that we currently totally lack and I do fear for the futures of my six grandchildren.
I think the answers are clear:
A. You are totally justified in your fear. Most probably human civilization's future is doomed.
B. Only (very partial) solutions that do give some short-term economic benefit, or at least do not require heavy altruism, have any chance of being taken up in mass.

This is really beyond the scope of this thread, so I will refrain from further development of these points.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Shared Humanity on November 05, 2018, 07:42:54 PM
It requires altruism, a long term vision and the sort of global leadership that we currently totally lack and I do fear for the futures of my six grandchildren.

As well you should.

A good place to carry on this conversation would be here.

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1102.0.html
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on November 06, 2018, 03:47:23 AM
Updated graph with October's 406 ppm value.  I also extended it back to October of 2006.  I chose this year because it was a La Niña transition to weak El Niño year.   It was also near the peak of the bull market/GDP. 
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Bernard on November 07, 2018, 10:34:55 AM
It's the Keeling Curve full record that tells this story best. Continuous acceleration of growth, not a sign of a downturn during the 2008 crash and no visible impact of Paris.
Indeed. And one of the many savvy graph hackers around could/should come out with a very powerful image based on this, placing so-called significant events dates on this curve like Paris or whatever up-and-downs of the global economy, just to show that so far their impact on this curve is just nihil.  I can have a try, although I'm not a very good graph hacker.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Pmt111500 on November 07, 2018, 01:44:56 PM
Yep, the ENSO phase is one big natural regulator of this. The effect it has on outgassing and oceanic intake should be taken out of the co2 graph, before trying to attribute anthropogenic influences to parts of the graph.

Some reading here onwards https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,66.msg23919.html#msg23919

Continued on the next page
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on November 20, 2018, 06:47:58 AM
November is going to be a big growth month.  Likely well over 3 ppm.  The week of the 11th came in at 3.83 ppm year-over-year change compared to the same week in 2017.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Pmt111500 on November 20, 2018, 06:53:46 AM
November is going to be a big growth month.  Likely well over 3 ppm.  The week of the 11th came in at 3.83 ppm year-over-year change compared to the same week in 2017.
Normal yearly cycle rises commonly during this time of the year as the vegetation on Northern Hemisphere has entered hibernation, the ground microbes decompose much of the production of organic compounds by the plants. Note here that though leaf and other composts work faster than the natural decomposition, the end result is still much the same, the mulch aquired has about the same amount (or maybe a bit more) of organic matter and nutrients than natural decomposition, but in a more consetrated way. The winter (and spring) runoff of nutrients by the rains buries some of this in  the lakes, seas and oceans, hence eutrophication might be locally enhanced, after floods in particular... It's rise from last year that can in part be attributed to humans. (For those who are new to the subject).

Plant growth in the current CO2-enriched atmosphere may also have been strong in the past summer, but this depends very much on the water availability, which at least here was pretty poor. This might mean the relatively high rise from last year is either a result of extra decomposing or if the plants grew badly due water scarcity, the part of anthropogenic input has increased. This might be checked via estimates of NPP (dropping an acronym like i knew much of the subject). Net Primary Production can somewhat be measured from satellites, but I don't know how accurately the instruments on sky can track yearly changes on various areas.

One such tracker is here (no longer updated)
 https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/global-maps/MOD17A2_M_PSN
(Note when the updating of the NASA-graph has stopped (hi, Sc. Pruitt))

Oceanic autotrophs use mainly dissolved CO2 for their growth so variance here cannot be located as well as on land, the intake and outgassing depends more of the temperature of the surface than local productivity I guess. The warmth of tropics mean there's less dissolved CO2 so algal production of organic stuff is concentrated to cooler upwelling areas. Algae also have to fight against the excessive ultraviolet in tropical surface waters, thus they might experience less damage by giving up living on surface and let the red tides take over the habitat in surface...
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on November 20, 2018, 07:56:06 AM
Of course all of those natural processes are true. But as we know internal variability in rate change differences including ENSO, etc. would be smoothed out in a long enough timeseries.  Unfortunately the 1st & 2nd derivative are both positive: accelerating.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Sleepy on November 20, 2018, 10:07:19 AM
Early oil industry knowledge of CO2 and global warming
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0349-9

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=861.0;attach=111693;image)
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=861.0;attach=111694;image)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: J Cartmill on November 20, 2018, 12:08:39 PM
Geography also provides a smoother time series.
American Samoa is 14.2 S 170 W and near sea level.

Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: DrTskoul on November 21, 2018, 01:01:51 AM
Early oil industry knowledge of CO2 and global warming
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0349-9

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=861.0;attach=111693;image)
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=861.0;attach=111694;image)

So did the public, the government and every other industry... after all there were documentaries about climate change during that time ...
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Sleepy on November 21, 2018, 07:00:32 AM
Absolutely DrTskoul, and what was I during most of these years? A fool.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on December 04, 2018, 02:42:37 AM
A lot of empty days in November so I in-filled linearly with neighboring dates.  Could be off from the official release, we'll see.  I calculated 408.05 ppm.  That's a year-over-year change of 2.93 ppm.  That's the highest value since January 2017.  Also the running 12-month red line has begun its cyclical upswing. 
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: TerryM on December 04, 2018, 06:29:37 AM
2.93, Wow!


Will we even get a flat horizontal line before we reach 2 C above pre-industrial, or without civilizational collapse?
Though aware of the need to reduce CO2 for decades, we've instead increased the rate at which they're accumulating.
This inability to cooperate even in the face of extinction is the Achilles heel that doomed our culture, and possibly our species.


It's impossible to claim any progress at all until Dr Keeling's curve has turned back on itself.
How can we possibly explain this to the grand kids?
Terry
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Wherestheice on December 04, 2018, 07:40:02 AM
2.93, Wow!


Will we even get a flat horizontal line before we reach 2 C above pre-industrial, or without civilizational collapse?
Though aware of the need to reduce CO2 for decades, we've instead increased the rate at which they're accumulating.
This inability to cooperate even in the face of extinction is the Achilles heel that doomed our culture, and possibly our species.


It's impossible to claim any progress at all until Dr Keeling's curve has turned back on itself.
How can we possibly explain this to the grand kids?
Terry

Don’t worry to much. Human emissions should be around zero in a few decades. Oh and getting there will be a ride. Rip 8 billion people
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: silkman on December 04, 2018, 09:00:13 AM
Here's the Keeling Curve:
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: TerryM on December 05, 2018, 12:13:42 AM
Here's the Keeling Curve:


Stretched it out over a few decades and it appears quite different.
A tree as compared to the forest perhaps.


While weekly dots plot wavy charts, the yearly trend increases.
We've known of this for decades and we've done nothing to even slow the rate of increase.


Cambodia was bombed into the stone age - and the curve crept up
Vietnam won her independence - and the curve crept up
The Killing Fields made great theater - and the curve crept up
Oil prices peaked - and the curve crept up
Oil prices crashed - and the curve crept up
Hansen addressed congress - and the curve crept up
The Soviets called it quits - and the curve crept up
China industrialized - and the curve crept up
Russia went flat broke - and the curve crept up
Nicaragua was attacked - and the curve crept up
Oliver North introduced generations of kids to "crack" - and the curve crept up
Russia came back from the dead - and the curve crept up
Poppy Bush pulverized Iraq - and the curve crept up
Hummers began plying NY streets - and the curve crept up
America destroyed Afghanistan - and the curve crept up
Clinton killed 500,000 Iraqi kids - and the graph crept up
"W" shocked and awed Baghdad - and the graph crept up
The banking sector failed  and the curve crept up
Ontario pulled the plug on coal - and the curve crept up
Chavez traded oil for Cuban Doctors - and the curve crept up
Obama obliterated the richest country in Africa - and the graph crept up
Chavez died a "natural" death - and the curve crept up
Obama increased fleet mileage - and the curve crept up
Obama's coup in Honduras sees success - and the curve crept up
Putin forgave Cuba's debt - and the curve crept up
Obama signed the Paris Accord - and the curve crept up
Trump "unsigned" the Paris accord - and the curve crept up
Albertan forests burned and production stopped- and the curve crept up
Ukraine's government was overthrown - and the curve crept up
Crimea went home to Russia - and the curve crept up
The "Southern Line" was halted - and the curve crept up
Poland imported American LNG - and the curve crept up
The Hondurans fleeing the coup show up in Tijuana - and the curve crept up
Americans longevity dropped again - and the curve crept up
Musk's cars clocked a million miles - and the curve crept up
Poland preferred it's own coal to Russian gas - and the curve crept up


It seems as though killing Asians, Arabs and South Americans, even in vast quantities, has little effect on Keeling's curve. Bombing either poor or rich countries back to the stone age appears equally ineffective.
Those driving Teslas or Hummers haven't moved the needle any further than those overthrowing various governments have.
We've spent many fortunes on these schemes and more, and we're further behind than we were when Dr Keeling first began making marks on his chalkboard.


It's not as though we haven't been trying.
But when all you manufacture is bomb sights, soon all your problems look like targets.
Terry
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: oren on December 05, 2018, 02:06:46 AM
Terry, it beats me how you managed to confound warmongering and empire building, Tesla, and this thread's subject.
The Keeling curve does show a (small and temporary) slowdown of its rise rate around the time the Soviet Union broke up (though it's probably related to Pinatubo instead). But the financial crises of 2008 is indeed invisible on the curve, along with all the other historical events you mentioned.
Fleet mileage efficiency and EVs and closing coal plants are invisible on the curve, but hopefully will make a small dent in the rate rise as time goes by. Though I'm pretty sure that had fleet mileage not increased or coal plants not closed the curve would have been worse.
"We've spent many fortunes on these schemes" - on wars yes, way too much, but on clean energy initiatives and other mitigation measures no, far too little.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: TerryM on December 05, 2018, 03:28:48 AM
Yea
Sorry about the ramble oren.


Started out with a few items, then couldn't find the brake pedal. It's discouraging/infuriating to consider all of the very expensive (in every imaginable meaning of the word) things that we've been engaged in while never stumbling over anything that slowed down our seemingly inevitable race to the cliff.


I'm an old man who packed a bunch of living into my allotted time. If I die tomorrow, it will be with a contented smile on my lips.


But I've dreamt of our species going out into space, colonizing galaxies that would survive the implosion of our sun. Infinite time ahead to learn, invent and explore. It's an atheist's dream of eternity I suppose, and it's a hard thing to leave behind.


Life will go on, probably not mammalian life, but something better adapted to wild temperature swings. Will self aware intelligence rear it's battered head again? who knows. Those 9 brained octopuses might carry our torch. I'd often wondered if they might not be our equal today if they didn't die so young.


Anyway, it increasingly appears that we had our chance at the brass ring, but fell short because of greed.
What a very unappealing epitaph to leave behind.
Terry
edit/ this whole thing belongs in the "Near Term Human Extinction Thread" - My Bad.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: oren on December 05, 2018, 03:38:13 AM
Terry btw, though somewhat younger, I do share your dreams, and disappointment in them. I guess we should have elected the science fiction writers instead of the politicians. But yeah, this is way outside the scope of 2018 Mauna Loa...
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: silkman on December 05, 2018, 09:57:27 AM
Terry btw...... I do share your dreams, and disappointment in them.

Count me in.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Juan C. García on December 05, 2018, 09:32:16 PM
Quote
‘We are in trouble.’ Global carbon emissions reached a new record high in 2018.

As nations assemble in Poland for climate talks, the figures suggest there is no clear end in sight to the growth of humanity’s contribution to climate change.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/12/05/we-are-trouble-global-carbon-emissions-reached-new-record-high/?utm_term=.a8e502fdbd56 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/12/05/we-are-trouble-global-carbon-emissions-reached-new-record-high/?utm_term=.a8e502fdbd56)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Human Habitat Index on December 05, 2018, 10:52:53 PM
Here's the Keeling Curve:


Stretched it out over a few decades and it appears quite different.
A tree as compared to the forest perhaps.


While weekly dots plot wavy charts, the yearly trend increases.
We've known of this for decades and we've done nothing to even slow the rate of increase.


Cambodia was bombed into the stone age - and the curve crept up
Vietnam won her independence - and the curve crept up
The Killing Fields made great theater - and the curve crept up
Oil prices peaked - and the curve crept up
Oil prices crashed - and the curve crept up
Hansen addressed congress - and the curve crept up
The Soviets called it quits - and the curve crept up
China industrialized - and the curve crept up
Russia went flat broke - and the curve crept up
Nicaragua was attacked - and the curve crept up
Oliver North introduced generations of kids to "crack" - and the curve crept up
Russia came back from the dead - and the curve crept up
Poppy Bush pulverized Iraq - and the curve crept up
Hummers began plying NY streets - and the curve crept up
America destroyed Afghanistan - and the curve crept up
Clinton killed 500,000 Iraqi kids - and the graph crept up
"W" shocked and awed Baghdad - and the graph crept up
The banking sector failed  and the curve crept up
Ontario pulled the plug on coal - and the curve crept up
Chavez traded oil for Cuban Doctors - and the curve crept up
Obama obliterated the richest country in Africa - and the graph crept up
Chavez died a "natural" death - and the curve crept up
Obama increased fleet mileage - and the curve crept up
Obama's coup in Honduras sees success - and the curve crept up
Putin forgave Cuba's debt - and the curve crept up
Obama signed the Paris Accord - and the curve crept up
Trump "unsigned" the Paris accord - and the curve crept up
Albertan forests burned and production stopped- and the curve crept up
Ukraine's government was overthrown - and the curve crept up
Crimea went home to Russia - and the curve crept up
The "Southern Line" was halted - and the curve crept up
Poland imported American LNG - and the curve crept up
The Hondurans fleeing the coup show up in Tijuana - and the curve crept up
Americans longevity dropped again - and the curve crept up
Musk's cars clocked a million miles - and the curve crept up
Poland preferred it's own coal to Russian gas - and the curve crept up


It seems as though killing Asians, Arabs and South Americans, even in vast quantities, has little effect on Keeling's curve. Bombing either poor or rich countries back to the stone age appears equally ineffective.
Those driving Teslas or Hummers haven't moved the needle any further than those overthrowing various governments have.
We've spent many fortunes on these schemes and more, and we're further behind than we were when Dr Keeling first began making marks on his chalkboard.


It's not as though we haven't been trying.
But when all you manufacture is bomb sights, soon all your problems look like targets.
Terry


Terry, will you marry me ?  ;D
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Juan C. García on December 06, 2018, 01:39:53 AM
Terry, will you marry me ?  ;D

How sweet!
Terry, please answer Yes!
If we cannot have a reduction in CO2 emissions, at least something good will come on this Forum!


 ;)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: TerryM on December 06, 2018, 02:27:11 AM
Terry, will you marry me ?  ;D

How sweet!
Terry, please answer Yes!
If we cannot have a reduction in CO2 emissions, at least something good will come on this Forum!


 ;)


My wife may also encourage me to accept this wondrous offer. She's not entirely convinced that my increasing maintenance and upkeep costs are sustainable. ???
Terry
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Juan C. García on December 06, 2018, 02:42:03 AM
My wife may also encourage me to accept this wondrous offer. She's not entirely convinced that my increasing maintenance and upkeep costs are sustainable. ???
Terry

The same with my wife and me (even that I haven't received an offer…  :-\  ;D ).
Maybe everything ends up in the image posted by Neven.
I've used this quote several times before, but I'll do it again:
Let's keep trying and hoping that we will see a decrease in CO2 emissions in the near future.
[back to topic]
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on December 07, 2018, 01:52:36 AM
November officially came in at 408.02 ppm from NOAA.  I was only off by 0.03 ppm with my estimate.  That's a growth rate of 2.90 ppm.  Still the highest value since January 2017. 
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: oren on December 08, 2018, 10:56:49 AM
My layman's common sense supports the same rough calculation. If we cut roughly 5 GT of CO2 emissions, CO2 concentration should more or less stabilize. But only a carbon cycle expert can confirm this with confidence.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on December 08, 2018, 12:57:57 PM
My layman's common sense supports the same rough calculation. If we cut roughly 5 GT of CO2 emissions, CO2 concentration should more or less stabilize.

My layman's common sense (though perhaps uncommon sense is needed) says history has  CO2 ppm increasing faster as CO2 emissions increase, so why should the reverse not apply? (i.e. the percentage absorbed by the carbon sinks stays the same so CO2 ppm increases at a slower rate).

I looked around but the only stuff I could find was a 2009 paper on the effect of abrupt halts in emissions - http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/4/1/014012/meta

The scary bit in this paper is that if temperatures rise too far, the ocean sink fails.

Quote
We analyse the simulated mechanisms in HadCM3LC of the removal of atmospheric CO2 for the three century long model runs following cessation of emissions. In the 2012E0 experiment CO2 was removed from the atmosphere over the subsequent century by a combination of uptake by the land and ocean in a ratio of approx 1 : 2 (23 GtC and 54 GtC respectively, as shown in figure 2). The relatively small degree of climate change that had occurred by this time meant that the terrestrial biosphere was still acting as a carbon sink (due to increased CO2 fertilization of plant growth outweighing any temperature-increased plant or soil respiration). For the ocean, the increased atmospheric CO2 concentration was driving modest absorption. However in 2050E0 and 2100E0 the removal of CO2 from the atmosphere in the century after the emissions were zeroed was driven by a quite different balance of processes. The higher levels of CO2 drove increasing uptake by the ocean, which more than offset any potential reduction due to increasing ocean temperatures (higher temperatures can reduce the solubility of carbon dioxide into the mixed layer and uptake due to mixing of carbon into the deeper ocean, reducing potential `draw-down' of atmospheric CO2 (Prentice et al 2001, Sarmiento et al 1998). However what is noteworthy for these two scenarios is that the warmer global temperature (accompanied by precipitation changes) meant that, averaged globally, the terrestrial biosphere was unable to act as a sink of carbon. There is a modelled net terrestrial loss of 50 GtC and 76 GtC respectively over the 100 years following a cessation of emissions.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on December 08, 2018, 01:11:17 PM
I suggest reading
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/03/how-long-will-global-warming-last/

The ocean is taking up a large part of the emissions. The amount the ocean takes up in short term depends on the partial pressure of CO2 (just the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere) compared to what was already absorbed previously (which depends on past proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere).

The main first order effect therefore, is that if you half the emissions then you also half the amount the oceans take up and this is a rapid effect (like a Edit:month?year in the tropics).

Lots of other effects:
Land also adjusts to CO2 level but doesn't take up as much and may be a bit slower.
Sequestering to deep ocean - biology and water overturning cycle
Rock weathering.

These are getting slower and weaker effects.

Edit 2
See also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_fraction
and other searches for airborne fraction.

Quote
The airborne fraction is a scaling factor defined as the ratio of the annual increase in atmospheric CO
2 to the CO
2 emissions from anthropogenic sources.[1] It represents the proportion of human emitted CO2 that remains in the atmosphere. The fraction averages about 45%, meaning that approximately half the human-emitted CO
2 is absorbed by ocean and land surfaces. There is some evidence for a recent increase in airborne fraction, which would imply a faster increase in atmospheric CO
2 for a given rate of human fossil-fuel burning.[2] However, other sources suggest that the "fraction of carbon dioxide has not increased either during the past 150 years or during the most recent five decades".[3][4]

Changes in carbon sinks can affect the airborne fraction.

This concept exist because it is fairly stable. So cut emissions in half and the ocean and land uptake are also approx cut in half keeping the airborne fraction roughly the same.

Sorry for the bad news. This means cutting emissions in half does not get the job of stabilising CO2 levels done, we need like a 95% cut in emissions eventually rising to 100% in order to stabilise CO2 levels.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on December 08, 2018, 03:19:36 PM

Sorry for the bad news. This means cutting emissions in half does not get the job of stabilising CO2 levels done, we need like a 95% cut in emissions eventually rising to 100% in order to stabilise CO2 levels.

Last note from me on this thread on this

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273763195_Long-term_decline_of_the_Amazon_carbon_sink[
b]Long-term decline of the Amazon carbon sink (2015 paper)[/b]
Quote
The observed decline of the Amazon sink diverges markedly from the recent increase in terrestrial carbon uptake at the global scale, and is contrary to expectations based on models.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: oren on December 08, 2018, 10:18:15 PM
Thanks for the bad news crandles. So much for common sense...
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: wolfpack513 on January 02, 2019, 03:40:46 AM
I calculated 409.07 ppm for December 2018 from NOAA's CO2 data.  That's a year-over-year change of 2.26 ppm.  Annual growth rate for 2018-2017 was down to 1.97 ppm but that's somewhat expected in a 2nd year La Niña. 
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on January 05, 2019, 03:49:59 PM
January 04:     410.03 ppm

First day over 410 since ~ end of Jun and likely to be mainly above 410 for next 6 to 7 months.

2018 annual average will be well below 410, but perhaps one more way of saying we have reached 410 level has been reached.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: Tor Bejnar on January 05, 2019, 06:01:13 PM
Quote
likely to be mainly above 410 for next 6 to 7 months
Or, in other words, likely to be mainly above 410 for the rest of my life.
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on January 05, 2019, 09:03:36 PM
Quote
likely to be mainly above 410 for next 6 to 7 months
Or, in other words, likely to be mainly above 410 for the rest of my life.

or any period starting now.  ;)
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on January 21, 2019, 03:43:24 PM
Jan 19 412.51 ppm

A burp upwards and lots of variation in the last few days c.f. average. Will it last?
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: kassy on January 22, 2019, 01:46:54 PM
There is a 2019 thread now:
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2541.0.html
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: gerontocrat on January 22, 2019, 02:34:53 PM
There is a 2019 thread now:
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2541.0.html

Moved,

thanks, kassy
Title: Re: 2018 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
Post by: crandles on January 31, 2019, 11:01:40 PM
I suggest reading
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/03/how-long-will-global-warming-last/

The ocean is taking up a large part of the emissions. The amount the ocean takes up in short term depends on the partial pressure of CO2 (just the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere) compared to what was already absorbed previously (which depends on past proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere).

The main first order effect therefore, is that if you half the emissions then you also half the amount the oceans take up and this is a rapid effect (like a Edit:month?year in the tropics).

Lots of other effects:
Land also adjusts to CO2 level but doesn't take up as much and may be a bit slower.
Sequestering to deep ocean - biology and water overturning cycle
Rock weathering.

These are getting slower and weaker effects.

Edit 2
See also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_fraction
and other searches for airborne fraction.

Quote
The airborne fraction is a scaling factor defined as the ratio of the annual increase in atmospheric CO
2 to the CO
2 emissions from anthropogenic sources.[1] It represents the proportion of human emitted CO2 that remains in the atmosphere. The fraction averages about 45%, meaning that approximately half the human-emitted CO
2 is absorbed by ocean and land surfaces. There is some evidence for a recent increase in airborne fraction, which would imply a faster increase in atmospheric CO
2 for a given rate of human fossil-fuel burning.[2] However, other sources suggest that the "fraction of carbon dioxide has not increased either during the past 150 years or during the most recent five decades".[3][4]

Changes in carbon sinks can affect the airborne fraction.

This concept exist because it is fairly stable. So cut emissions in half and the ocean and land uptake are also approx cut in half keeping the airborne fraction roughly the same.

Sorry for the bad news. This means cutting emissions in half does not get the job of stabilising CO2 levels done, we need like a 95% cut in emissions eventually rising to 100% in order to stabilise CO2 levels.

Seems I have got some of this stuff wrong and I should come back and correct and add better info.

See comments commencing 12 Jan 2019 at
https://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2019/01/predictions.html

and some continuation at
https://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2019/01/blueskiesresearchorguk-costs-of.html

Quote
Ok here are results from a sudden stop in emissions. Cols are years, emissions in ppm CO2 equiv, atmosphere conc and the annual increment. The drop is immediate but modest and tails away fairly quickly. Which I think is what I said. I hope :-)

The temp stays very flat, it actually drops a whisker for a few decades before increasing very gradually over the centennial time scale. Due to the deep ocean gradually warming.

[159,] 2010 3.9877255 386.2585 2.04413596
[160,] 2011 4.0634923 388.3413 2.08285478
[161,] 2012 4.1406986 390.4636 2.12230999
[162,] 2013 4.2193719 392.6261 2.16251556
[163,] 2014 4.2995400 394.8296 2.20348574
[164,] 2015 4.3812312 397.0749 2.24523507
[165,] 2016 4.4644746 399.3626 2.28777833
[166,] 2017 4.5492996 401.6938 2.33113060
[167,] 2018 4.6357363 404.0691 2.37530726
[168,] 2019 4.7238153 406.4894 2.42032396
[169,] 2020 4.8135678 408.9556 2.46619665
[170,] 2021 0.0000000 406.5635 -2.39208398
[171,] 2022 0.0000000 404.7401 -1.82341108
[172,] 2023 0.0000000 403.1955 -1.54462036
[173,] 2024 0.0000000 401.8031 -1.39232590
[174,] 2025 0.0000000 400.5070 -1.29612394
[175,] 2026 0.0000000 399.2814 -1.22562982
[176,] 2027 0.0000000 398.1137 -1.16768541
[177,] 2028 0.0000000 396.9972 -1.11655029
[178,] 2029 0.0000000 395.9275 -1.06968026
[179,] 2030 0.0000000 394.9016 -1.02591050

Quote
Hi, and thank you for the numbers. 2.392 going into sinks looks to be just a little larger than in each of the past three years and wasn't what I was expecting. Much nearer to what you said, but I'm not sure either of us were expecting increase in that first year.

Sinks of 1.0259 is less than 43% of the 2.392 in just 9 years. I would doubt that continues as an exponential decline.

Quote
Chris, this version of the model only has a 1y tilmestep so the details within that time scale are a bit imprecise. In fact the sink into deep ocean for the first year (after stopping emissions) won't see the atmospheric conc at all, whether it was +100 or -100 would make no difference. A shorter time step (but the same underlying equations) would change that just a fraction I think.

Carbon equation has 3 time scales (and 20% of emissions stay in atmosphere for ever) so a simple exponential won't describe it well. Still 340ppm at 2350 in this scenario.

This model uses "the Myhrvold and Caldeira" equations.