{"id":213985,"date":"2022-08-17T10:50:08","date_gmt":"2022-08-17T08:50:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=213985"},"modified":"2022-08-17T10:50:09","modified_gmt":"2022-08-17T08:50:09","slug":"the-impact-of-human-co2-on-atmospheric-co2-summary","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=213985","title":{"rendered":"The Impact of Human CO2 On Atmospheric CO2 \u2013 Summary"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Edwin X Berry, Montana, USA \u2013 2022-08-02<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Copyright (c) 2022 by Edwin X Berry. Permission granted to republish with link to\u00a0Berry (2021).<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a>Introduction<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

This summary of Berry (2021) shows the main points without the math.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a>1. How CO2 flows out of the atmosphere.<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change <\/em>(IPCC) correctly assumes the outflow of CO2 from the atmosphere is proportional to the CO2 level divided by a time constant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This time constant \u2013 that the IPCC calls \u201cturnover time\u201d and we call \u201ce-time\u201d \u2013 describes how fast CO2 flows out of the atmosphere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

IPCC (2007, p. 948) defines \u201cturnover time\u201d equal to the first power of the carbon level divided by the outflow of carbon from the reservoir,<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cTurnover time (T) is the ratio of the mass M of a reservoir (e.g., a gaseous compound in the atmosphere) and the total rate of removal S from the reservoir: T = M \/ S. For each removal process, separate turnover times can be defined.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

IPCC (2007, p. 948) says the turnover time (T) for natural CO2 is about four years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cCarbon dioxide <\/em>(CO2) is an extreme example. Its turnover time is only about four years because of the rapid exchange between the atmosphere and the ocean and terrestrial biota.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

IPCC\u2019s data for its natural carbon cycle (IPCC, 2013, p. 470-471) show the e-time for atmospheric CO2 is 3.5 years, supporting IPCC\u2019s statement of \u201cabout four years.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Simple physics shows when outflow is proportional to the first power of level, natural and human carbon cycles are independent. So, we can calculate these carbon cycles independently and then add them up to get the total. We need only to calculate the human carbon cycle over time to see how human CO2 changes atmospheric CO2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a>2.  The first approximation conflicts with IPCC claims.<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

IPCC\u2019s data show the inflow of human CO2 into the atmosphere is about 5% of the total CO2 inflow and natural CO2 is about 95%.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since human and natural CO2 molecules are identical, their e-times are identical. Therefore, to the first approximation, the composition of today\u2019s atmospheric CO2 is about 5% human and 95% natural.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yet, IPCC (2013, p. 467, Executive Summary) says,<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWith a very high level of confidence, the increase in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel burning and those arising from land use change are the dominant cause of the observed increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

IPCC (2013, pp. 470-471) assumes the natural CO2 level remained at 280 ppm after 1750 and, therefore, human CO2 caused all the CO2 increase since 1750. This would make human CO2 about 32% of 415 ppm as of 2020.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How can a 5% inflow cause 32% of the CO2 level?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It can\u2019t. Even the IPCC realizes this problem. So, to support its claim that human CO2 causes dangerous climate change, the IPCC incorrectly claims human CO2 stays in the atmosphere longer than natural CO2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

IPCC (2013, p. 469) incorrectly claims:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe removal of human-emitted CO2 from the atmosphere by natural processes will take a few hundred thousand years (high confidence). \u2026 about 15 to 40% of emitted CO2 will remain in the atmosphere longer than 1,000 years. This long time required \u2026 to remove anthropogenic CO2 makes climate change caused by elevated CO2 irreversible on human time scale.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This IPCC claim violates IPCC\u2019s own data-based e-time and ignores that human and natural CO2 molecules are identical, and therefore their e-times are identical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a>3.  The second approximation proves the IPCC is wrong.<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

The first approximation considered only the atmosphere. The second approximation uses IPCC\u2019s four-reservoir carbon cycle model. The physics model, using outflow proportional to level and IPCC\u2019s e-times, replicates IPCC\u2019s natural carbon cycle, shown in Figure 1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Then, this same model calculates a human carbon cycle compatible with IPCC\u2019s natural carbon cycle, using recursive, annual time steps from 1750 to 2020, shown Figure 2.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This compatible human carbon cycle shows human CO2 has added only 33 ppm (8%) while nature has added 100 ppm (92%) to IPCC\u2019s 280 ppm level in 1750, as of 2020.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to the scientific method, the physics model has proved IPCC\u2019s claim \u2013 that human CO2 caused all the CO2 increase above 280 ppm \u2013 is false.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Good high-school students can learn how the physics model works.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a>4.  IPCC\u2019s natural carbon cycle<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

Figure 1 shows IPCC\u2019s natural carbon cycle at equilibrium with atmospheric CO2 at 280 ppm (589 PgC). The boxes show reservoirs and arrows the flows between reservoirs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Figure 1. Levels and flows for IPCC\u2019s (2013) natural carbon cycle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Figure 1 shows 1.4% of natural carbon is in the atmosphere and 90% is in the deep ocean. This is an equilibrium fingerprint that human carbon will approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

5.  Physics model applied to human carbon.<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

Figure 2 shows the physics carbon cycle model with IPCC\u2019s four reservoirs and six outflows, where the arrows are all positive numbers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Figure 2. The human carbon cycle model uses the same physics as IPCC\u2019s natural carbon cycle but adds the annual inflow of human carbon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Human carbon has added only one percent to the total carbon in the natural carbon cycle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Figure 3 shows how the reservoir levels change with time for human carbon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The purple dashed line shows the cumulative human carbon since 1750. The solid bold line shows the measured atmospheric carbon level above <\/em>280 ppmv.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Data alone prove natural CO2 increased the CO2 level above 280 ppm. The cumulative \u201cNew Human carbon added\u201d before 1955 is less than measured \u201catmospheric carbon,\u201d making it impossible for human carbon to have caused all the CO2 increase.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Figure 3. How human carbon levels change with time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The red dashed line shows human CO2 added to the atmosphere is much less than the \u201cNew Human carbon added\u201d because the CO2 e-time of 3.5 years lets CO2 flow out of the atmosphere much faster than it can accumulate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

6.  The Bern model uses IPCC\u2019s assumption.<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

Figure 4 compares the physics model with the Bern model.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Figure 4. Pulse decay by the physics model and the Bern model.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The key difference between the Bern model and the physics model is the Bern model uses IPCC\u2019s invalid assumption that human<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CO2 causes all the CO2 increase while the physics model uses IPCC\u2019s e-time of 3.5 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a>7.  Isotope data show CO2 increase is natural.<\/h1>\n\n\n\n

Figure 5 shows<\/p>\n\n\n\n