Sentences with phrase «co2 measurement data»

Even those who are, or who claim to be, unpersuaded by climate science, typically accept the now longstanding standard CO2 measurement data.

The smearing is similar to conduct of a running mean on CO2 measurement data from ice which solidified in each single year.

Not exact matches

The work included data from a variety of sources, including national emissions inventories kept by the United Nations, global estimates of energy use and direct measurements of atmospheric CO2 concentrations, and involved dozens of authors from institutes around the world.

Wennberg says that combining such measurements with OCO - 2 data could help researchers to detect hourly variations in CO2 production caused by plant photosynthesis — or even by rush - hour traffic in some large urban areas.

The data is only 33 years in length, but based on that data, there is no first order correlation between temperature and CO2 during its 33 year period and this suggests that then signal to CO2 (ie., Climate Sensitivity) is so low that it can not be measured within the sensitivity, resolution and errors of our best current temperature measurements.

The following topics were covered: seawater carbonate chemistry, experimental design of perturbation experiments, measurements of CO2 - sensitive processes and data reporting and usage.

That is the case whether you are extrapolating from paleoclimate data or from any recent temperature dataset vs atmospheric CO2 concentration measurements (eg Keeling curve).

A study in Science says that tropical forests are now net sources of CO2: Here we use 12 years (2003 — 2014) of MODIS pantropical satellite data to quantify net annual changes in the aboveground carbon density of tropical woody live vegetation, providing direct, measurement - based evidence that the world's tropical forests are a net carbon source of 425.2 ± 92.0 Tg C yr — 1.

That is the case whether you are extrapolating from paleoclimate data or from any recent temperature dataset vs atmospheric CO2 concentration measurements (eg Keeling curve).

In addition to the data from tree rings, there are also of measurements of the 13C / 12C ratio in the CO2 trapped in ice cores.

a) atmospheric CO2 from human activity is a major bause of observed warming in the 1980's and 1990's, c) that warming is overstated due to a number of factors including solar effects and measurement skew d) the data going back 150 years is of little reliability because it is clustered so heavily in northeast america and western europe rather than being global e) the global climate has been significantly shifting over the last thousand years, over the last ten thousand years, and over the last hundred thousand years; atmospheric CO2 levels did not drive those changes, and some of them were rapid.

If anyone is still uncertain about how consistent CO2 measurements are globally, please go to the World Data Center for Greenhouse Gases, search for CO2 data from various stations, and look at them yoursData Center for Greenhouse Gases, search for CO2 data from various stations, and look at them yoursdata from various stations, and look at them yourself.

CO2 measurements are suspect «The Keeling curve, which is widely used to show the increase in CO2 emissions, is based on data from the top of Mount Mauna Loa in Hawaii.

Re: Ferdinand Engelbeen (# 182) In this series of data the CO2 Measurements for Barrow, Alaska drop to a minimum each year during August (months 8, 20 & 32).

BUT that an average of all those measurements is SO MUCH HIGHER than Antarctic CO2 data, so again its unrealistic to think all these Beck data are all wrong — and all just «happends» to be too warm?!! ABSURD!

By contrast, there is quite a lot of data now telling us that CO2 is not a climate driver: We did the experiment of adding a large slug of CO2 to the air and the temperature stopped rising in 1997, the stratosphere stopped cooling in 1995 and the oceans showed no warming down to 700m when we replaced guesswork with accurate measurement in 2003.

Measurements at high wind speed and / or over the oceans show about the same CO2 levels as the ice core data of the same period.

Thus if one plots all the minima of the different historical measurements, that gives a better impression of the real «background» CO2 level than the averages: see The same for ocean data and coastal data: all are around the ice core level.

My formula matches with the ice core measurements, your formula not, despite a 20 years overlap between SPO direct data and ice core CO2.

The Trump administration has killed NASA's Carbon Monitoring System, which was responsible for compiling data from separate satellite and aircraft measurements of CO2 and methane emission across the Earth.

All different observations of past CO2 levels have their own problems, be it chemical measurements, ice cores, stomata data or coralline sponges.

Most interesting is that the about monthly variations correlate with the lunar phases (peak on full moon) The Helsinki Background measurements 1935 The first background measurements in history; sampling data in vertical profile every 50 - 100m up to 1,5 km; 364 ppm underthe clouds and above Haldane measurements at the Scottish coast 370 ppmCO2 in winds from the sea; 355 ppm in air from the land Wattenberg measurements in the southern Atlantic ocean 1925-1927 310 sampling stations along the latitudes of the southern Atlantic oceans and parts of the northern; measuring all oceanographic data and CO2 in air over the sea; high ocean outgassing crossing the warm water currents north (> ~ 360 ppm) Buchs measurements in the northern Atlantic ocean 1932 - 1936 sampling CO2 over sea surface in northern Atlantic Ocean up to the polar circle (Greenland, Iceland, Spitsbergen, Barents Sea); measuring also high CO2 near Spitsbergen (Spitsbergen current, North Cape current) 364 ppm and CO2 over sea crossing the Atlantic from Kopenhagen to Newyork and back (Brements on a swedish island Lundegards CO2 sampling on swedish island (Kattegatt) in summer from 1920 - 1926; rising CO2 concentration (+7 ppm) in the 20s; ~ 328 ppm yearly average

Engineering Prof. Questions Temperature Record, Models, CO2 Climate Sensitivity Photo California Baptist University Pontius, 2017 Sustainable Infrastructure: Climate Changes and Carbon Dioxide Temperatures Record «Unreliable», «Arbitrarily Adjusted», And Of «Poor Data Quality» Temperature measurement stations have been installed at various locations across the globe.

«Recent indirect data and direct measurements from ice cores point towards a lsquopre - industrialrsquo CO2 level of around 260 — 270 ppmv, considerably below the commonly assumed value of 290 ppmv.

Here we construct a database of worldwide RS observations matched with high - resolution historical climate data and find a previously unknown temporal trend in the RS record after accounting for mean annual climate, leaf area, nitrogen deposition and changes in CO2 measurement technique.

Thomas van Hoof et al., «Atmospheric CO2 during the 13th Century AD: reconciliation of data from ice core measurements and stomatal frequency analysis,» Tellus, 2005, 57B, pp. 351 - 355, http://www.phys.uu.nl/~wal/research/papers/hoofetal2005.pdf 15.

Also, there is paleoclimate data that contradicts the ice - core data, such as Stomata and we have 90,000 direct empirical chemical measurements dating back to 1812 of atmospheric with a 3 % accuracy that depicts CO2 as high as 440ppm (Beck 2007).

The wel known graph for CO2 is based on Ice core data -LRB-» Siple») and direct measurements from Hawaii (Mauna Loa).

-- robust radiative physics — ground - based instrumental evidence that CO2 absorbs and therefore emits IR exactly in accordance with the physical theory — satellite data confirming this — satellite data apparently indicating a radiative imbalance at TOA — robust measurements of the fraction of atmospheric CO2 — increasing global OHC since the mid-C20th

If the ice - core data were reliable I still can not see why the raw measurements depict CO2 concentrations that fluctuate between 170ppm - 2450ppm.

The idea that the ice - core measurements are «reliable» seems highly unlikely to me, especially considering that the raw data (before adjustment) depicted CO2 concentrations oscillating between 170pp - 700 pm and even as high as 2450ppm.

Not to mention that the «hockey - stick - like» CO2 data from ice cores + modern measurements is a carefully crafted stalking horse — you have to ignore most pre-industrial measurements (cherry - picking the low ones) and also the bulk of the stomata proxies to believe it.

Splicing the highly questionable ice core records CO2 data with the ML instrumental measurements?

This means that the trend indicated by the Colorado data is calibrated not to actual measurements, but co2 theory.

GLOBALVIEW data products are designed to enhance the spatial and temporal distribution of atmospheric observations of CO2, CH4 and other related atmospheric measurements.

Since then, satellite reading of temperatures and the occlusion of numerous infrared bands, ground based, aircraft and balloon measurements of same, and an ever - increasing data base of the optical properties of CO2 (and other gases, like water vapour), have helped refine radiation calculations towards determining the atmospheric heat budget.

For instance the Vostok ice - core data over 415,000 years has an average measurement - spacing of 756 years, meaning that the likelihood of measuring an increase in atmospheric CO2 as the one measured at Mauna Loa over the last 50 years, if one existed in the Vostok ice - core samples, amounts to 6.6 % (i.e. 50/756).

Many of the historical CO2 data by chemical methods compiled by Ernst Beck are measurements (with less accuracy) which were taken at places nearby huge sources over land, not resembling background CO2 levels.

We learned that the CO2 readings are based on measurements taken on the site of an active volcano (Mauna Loa) and have been completely fabricated out of whole cloth by a father and son team who have turned data manipulation into a cottage industry for years.

Most modern CO2 concentration measurements also show much more variablility than the highly - processed Manua Loa data that warmist so like to quote.

Therefore, a correction factor (× 0.2458) was applied, obtained from a series of simultaneous CO2 flux measurements from a floating chamber connected to an EGM - 4 (PP - Systems) performed at the same time as surface gas concentrations were collected [4](data from 2007 to 2010, n = 57, r2 = 0.689, p < 0.001; unpubl.

Beck's data (90,000 measurements) suggest that CO2 levels oscillate naturally, like all the other climate parameters.

QUOTE:» There were over 3 million pCO2 measurements of ocean waters in the past decades which confirm Henry's law...» ANSWER: You seem to refer to Takahashi's data; as the exchange of CO2 between air and water is strongly dependent upon the speed of the wind (as the third power of the wind according to Wanninkof & McGillis 1999) it's not Henry law!

Atmospheric CO2 has risen from an estimated pre-industrial level of 280 ppmv (based on ice core data) to 390 ppmv today, based on actual Mauna Loa measurement.

The 2 types of data are totally unrelated, and a 20 % uncertainty in the estimate of CO2 change due to Deforestation is unrelated to the error in measurement of CO2 increase in PPM over the years, which is highly accurate based on spectroscopy, and duplicated at many sites over the globe.

The statistical manipulation of raw measurement data of CO2 concentration in air from both within polar ice and atop a volcano in the middle of the pacific requires no less scrutiny by independent expert statisticians than the temperature analyses warranted.

An examination of the data from: i) measurements of the fractionation of CO2 by way of Carbon - 12 and Carbon - 13 isotopes; ii) the seasonal variations of the concentration of CO2 in the Northern Hemisphere; and iii) the time delay between Northern and Southern Hemisphere variations in CO2, raises questions about the conventional explanation of the source of increased atmospheric CO2.

So they unilaterally discount virtually all direct CO2 measurements and rely in indirect loss - riddled ice core data.

It's true that if you discard all the data on paleo CO2 from ice cores, and you discard modern direct measurements of CO2 in the atmosphere, then you could assume the existence of a natural increase in atmospheric CO2 greater than the fossil fuel emissions.

[/ quote] The pre industrial CO2 data is based on ice core data, and a number of chemical measurements made during the 19 and 20th century, as was shown by Callendar, once the data was scrubbed to eliminate samples downwind from contaminated areas.