You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Science & Technology
No Rise of Atmospheric CO2 Fraction in Past 160 Years
2010-01-02
ScienceDaily (Dec. 31, 2009) — Most of the carbon dioxide emitted by human activity does not remain in the atmosphere, but is instead absorbed by the oceans and terrestrial ecosystems. In fact, only about 45 percent of emitted carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere.

However, some studies have suggested that the ability of oceans and plants to absorb carbon dioxide recently may have begun to decline and that the airborne fraction of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions is therefore beginning to increase.

Many climate models also assume that the airborne fraction will increase. Because understanding of the airborne fraction of carbon dioxide is important for predicting future climate change, it is essential to have accurate knowledge of whether that fraction is changing or will change as emissions increase.

To assess whether the airborne fraction is indeed increasing, Wolfgang Knorr of the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Bristol reanalyzed available atmospheric carbon dioxide and emissions data since 1850 and considers the uncertainties in the data. In contradiction to some recent studies, he finds that the airborne fraction of carbon dioxide has not increased either during the past 150 years or during the most recent five decades.

The research is published in Geophysical Research Letters.
Posted by:Steve White

#4  Geophysical Research Letters has been intended as an outlet for rapid publication of new areas of research, and peer review has tended to be less rigorous in order to speed up publication.
This article does not prove or disprove AGW; it DOES point out the complexity of the system, and how much we still don't know.
Posted by: Glenmore   2010-01-02 20:10  

#3  This research doesn't sound very sound,

But, but...it's peer reviewed.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2010-01-02 10:08  

#2  This research doesn't sound very sound, so lets not get our hopes up.

Is there a difference between Anthropomorphic CO2 and "natural" CO2? Nope.

AGW is still a scam. But using bad science to prove it is shooting yourself in the foot.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2010-01-02 09:55  

#1  very timely as the EPA is preparing for a power grab over CO2 if Cap and Tax dies its' well-earned death. Suck it, Carol Browner!
Posted by: Frank G   2010-01-02 07:35  

00:00