Re: CO2 and global warming
From: William Clodius (wclodius_at_lanl.gov)
Date: 09/24/04
- Next message: Martin Frey: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Previous message: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: Is the Moon the Saudi Arabia of the 21st Century?"
- In reply to: Wayne_J: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Next in thread: Thomas Lee Elifritz: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Reply: Thomas Lee Elifritz: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 23 Sep 2004 17:14:59 -0700
Wayne_Jacobs@mchsi.com (Wayne_J) wrote in message news:<548a7ea8.0409230705.5c578eb7@posting.google.com>...
> <snip>
>
> CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere have been measured at an
> altitude of about 4,000 meters on the peak of Mauna Loa mountain in
> Hawaii since 1958. The measurements at this location, remote from
> local sources of pollution, have clearly shown that atmospheric
> concentrations of CO2 are increasing. The mean concentration of
> approximately 316 parts per million by volume (ppmv) in 1958 rose to
> approximately 369 ppmv in 1998. The annual variation is due to CO2
> uptake by growing plants. The uptake is highest in the northern
> hemisphere springtime. That's .000369% @ 4000 feet @ 10000 feet it
> falls to 202 ppm and at 30000 to 96 ppm.
You seem to be confusing fraction with percent.
369 ppm is a decimal fraction of 0.000369 and a percent of 0.0369%
You also seem to be confusing feet with meters.
Do you have a citation for the values of 202 ppm and 96 ppm? I have
not been able to find anything pertinent using google. I find the
claim surprising as atmospheric turbulence reputedly mixes gases well
in the troposphere (i.e. to well above 10000 m).
> By the time it reaches this
> altitude it normally mixes with the lighter elements of hydrogen and
> oxygen to return to the earth as acid rain so that at 60000 feet the
> total concentration is less then .000001
> http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/06.htm
This has no discussion of the altitude dependence. I find your claimed
chemistry surprising. Do you have a citation? I thought there were
essentially no free oxygen atoms below 80 km as they combine readilly
with oxygen molecules to form ozone. I would expect negilible amouns
of hydrogen atoms as well.
>
>
> Want to learn more? Take a few graduate courses on chemical
> interactions and complex chemical makeup. Or just look at a freaking
> chart of the elements and compare the atomic weights to specific
> gravities and you'll see that CO2 cannot make it above apx 70,000
> feet.
Specific gravity? You make this claim even in the presence of
turbulent mixing?
> Oh by the way to believe in global warming you have to ignore
> the most basic, and first, law of energy transfer ? Heat must move
> from Hot to Cold. If this is true then why hasn't the temperatures in
> the upper atmosphere been increasing?
> http://www.nasa.gov and look at upper climate temperatures.
Can you be more specific? NASA's search engine gives more than 4000
citations for "upper climate temperatures" My impression was that
recent studies of the upper troposphere found that it was geting
warmer but not as warm as most predictions.
- Next message: Martin Frey: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Previous message: Paul F. Dietz: "Re: Is the Moon the Saudi Arabia of the 21st Century?"
- In reply to: Wayne_J: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Next in thread: Thomas Lee Elifritz: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Reply: Thomas Lee Elifritz: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|