Daily Events Under Feature

The carbon dioxide level is dangerously low

The carbon dioxide level is dangerously low

The following as been excerpted from Twilight of Abundance: Why Life in the 21st Century will be Nasty, Brutish, and Short by David Archibald:

The United States is needlessly penalizing itself and squandering its resource endowment, all because of the big lie that carbon dioxide is causing dangerous global warming. The Chinese, in contrast, merely pay lip service to that big lie. The only reason they are making a token effort on the “global warming” front is to encourage Western countries to continue hobbling their own economies. One can be forgiven for thinking that there must be some truth in the global warming notion given how much noise its advocates have made. But as with most causes promoted by leftist ideologues, the truth is exactly the opposite to their claim. The fact of the matter is the carbon dioxide level of the atmosphere remains dangerously low at four hundred parts per million. In fact the more carbon dioxide there is in the atmosphere, the better for all forms of life on planet Earth.

Before the Industrial Revolution, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere stood at 286 parts per million. Let us round this number to 300 parts per million to make the sums easier. Naturally occurring greenhouse gases ensure that the planet is 30°C warmer than it would otherwise be if they were not in the atmosphere, so the average temperature of the planet’s surface is 15°C instead of -15°C. Water vapor is responsible for 80 percent of that effect, and carbon dioxide for only 10 percent, with methane, ozone, and so forth accounting for the remainder. So the approximately 300 parts per million of carbon dioxide is good for 3°C degrees of warming. If the relationship between carbon dioxide concentration and temperature were arithmetic—in other words, a straight linear relationship—then adding another 100 parts per million of carbon dioxide would result in one degree of warming. We are adding 2 parts per million to the atmosphere annually, or 100 parts per million every fifty years. At that rate, humanity would fry.

Thankfully, the relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide and temperature is logarithmic, not arithmetic. The first 20 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere provides 1.6°C of warming, after which the effect drops away rapidly. From the current level of 400 parts per million, each addition of 100 parts per million adds only 0.1°C of warming. By the time we have dug up all the rocks we can economically burn, and burned them, we may reach 600 parts per million in the atmosphere. So perhaps we might add another 0.2°C of warming over the next two centuries. That warming will be lost in the noise of natural climate variation. So much for the problem of global warming! As a greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide is tuckered out. On the positive side of the ledger, it is very beneficial as aerial fertilizer. The carbon dioxide that mankind has put into the atmosphere to date has in fact boosted crop yields by 15 percent. This is like giving the Third World countries free phosphate fertilizer. Who could possibly be so heartless as to deny under- developed countries that benefit, at no cost to anyone?

The real threat is dangerously low levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The Earth has been in a glacial period for the last 3 million years, including some sixty separate glacial advances and retreats. The current Holocene interglacial period might last up to another 3,000 years before the Earth plunges into another glaciation. Carbon dioxide is a gas highly soluble in water, and its solubility is highly temperature dependent. The colder the planet is, the more carbon dioxide the oceans absorb. During glaciations the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere has fallen to as low at 180 parts per million. It needs to be stressed that plant life shuts down at 150 parts per million, as plants are unable to operate with the partial pressure differential of carbon dioxide between their cells and the atmosphere. Several times during the last 3 million years, life above sea level was within 30 parts per million of being extinguished by a lack of carbon dioxide. The flowering plants we rely upon in our diet evolved 100 million years ago when the carbon dioxide level was four times the current concentration. For plant life, the current amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is near starvation levels

And unfortunately, the carbon dioxide that human beings are pumping into the atmosphere will not be there for very long. There is fifty times as much carbon dioxide held by the oceans as there is in the atmosphere. As the deep oceans turn over, on an eight-hundred-year cycle of circulation, they will take the carbon dioxide now in the atmosphere down into Davy Jones’s Locker, where it will be of no use to man, beast, or plant life. Agricultural productivity will rise for the next two centuries or so, along with the atmospheric carbon dioxide level, after which it will fall away. By the year 3000 AD, the atmosphere’s carbon dioxide level will be only a couple of percent higher than before the Industrial Revolution. Life above sea level will therefore remain dangerously pre- carious because of the low carbon dioxide level.

“Global warming” is an irrational belief whose proponents demonstrate no interest in examining scientific evidence that may prove their beliefs incorrect. As a simple cult, it has failed to progress much beyond the concept of original sin, apocalyptic visions, sumptuary laws, and the selling of indulgences. Wind farms are the temples of this state-sponsored belief system. This cult doesn’t extend to building aged-care homes, hospitals, or anything much for the common good. Instead it degrades the fabric of society by misdirecting human effort. Its true believers can hardly be blamed; the global warming cult is not much different from any of the other end-of-the-world cults that have preceded it. Society’s opprobrium should be saved for the gatekeepers who have failed in their duty to protect the public from the depredations of the global warming rent-seekers and charlatans. The boards and executive staffs of a number of learned societies across the Western world have embraced this cult against the wishes of the majority of their members…

The fact that the world has not warmed since 1998 (in defiance of the global warming scare) hasn’t dented cult members’ faith. Arguing scientific evidence with them is pointless. It will take something far worse than a return of the frigid winters of the 1970s to create doubt in their minds. That something worse is coming. Millions of people may have to endure many harsh years before this pernicious cult is vanquished. And until the global warming myth is exploded, the security of the United States—and thus of the world—is also at risk.

David Archibald is a climate expert and a fellow at the Institute of World Politics.

Sign Up
  • blinnglad321

    My Uncle Isaac just got a nice 12 month old
    Jeep from only workin on a pc at home… Read Full Article C­a­s­h­F­i­g­.­ℂ­o­m

  • AgTrotter

    Mr. Archibald, I simply must protest this article. By using actual science and math, you will probably cause severe mental and emotional duress to every liberal that reads this. As such, this article should be considered dangerous. Now, if we can only get HuffPo and Mother Jones to post it.

  • Buypass

    He nails it.

  • Dustoff

    LOL, love it. Pot smokers are killing the planet.

  • Wxcynic

    He would have more credibility if his numbers were closer to reality, but his point is valid.

  • rdman_VietVet

    Hey Treehuggers… carbon dioxide for trees is the same as oxygen is for humans.

  • marlene

    EXACTLY!

  • Phillip Maine

    I love the article, and would agree because Global Warming in a Gov put up Job. youtube John Moore, the truth behind global warming for more info. However, the top thirty feet of the planets oceans are what absorb most of the CO2 and because of the Japanese accident the Pacific ocean is dying. The CO2 absorption will go down by more then 1/3. It is peak oxygen that is the danger and peak oxygen is already dropping. When it reaches 12% the human mind zombifies, at 8% we die.

  • Michael Bowen

    OK I am going to make this as simple as possible for the Global warming (climate Change ) crowd PLANTS CO2 in O2 out People O2 in CO2 out any question ? last the more CO2 the faster and better plants grow the better plants grow the more O2 they make the more O2 they make the easier WE Breath .that’s settled Science FACT .

  • Carla Adam

    last the more CO2 the faster and better plants grow the better plants grow the more O2 they make the more O2 they make the easier WE Breath .

  • cerberus

    Excellent article. I go along 99% with what you, although as I’m not a luke warmer I have to point to the fact that there is no evidence over any time scale whatsoever over the past 600 million years that CO2 has ever had any remotely measurable effect on real world climate at all. If anyone has such evidence I’d be interested to see it.

    If CO2 has any warming effect it is difficult to explain why this has not been evident over the last seventeen years. Or for that matter how we could have had a Great Ice Age in the Ordovician when CO2 was at eighteen times its current level. And so on. Indeed the only relation between climate and CO2 that has ever been observed is the other way with climate driving CO2 with a lag of hundreds of years, as we know.

    The carbon phobia cargo cult is nothing less than a genuine example of a mass hysteria which has infected virtually the whole political class of the Western world. This is somewhat ironic because these are the very same people who take delight in insulting the public whenever a body of individuals experience some inexplicable affliction by attributing it to mass hysteria. Part of the explanation for this aberrant behaviour must lie in what is effectively psychological positive feedback. In order to indoctrinate the public in the new AGW state religion (in the UK at least) the politicians employ every means at their disposal from brainwashing school children to wall to wall radio and TV propaganda broadcasting 24/7. However the main effect is they themselves become ever more certain of the truth of their lies while the public, with their instinctive distrust of politicos become ever more doubting! With every turn of the process, through positive feedback, politicians become ever more distanced from the real world just as nature resists their exhortations to explode calamitously with greater disdain with every passing year.

  • ebonystone

    “peak oxygen — when it reaches 12% the human mind zombifies,…”

    Current oxygen level in Washington, D.C.: 12.5%.

  • johndubose

    This guy is just a silly wrong as the AGW crowd. CO2 is regulate magnificently by the HUGE natural sources and sinks. We are like the knat crawling up the elephants leg with nookie on his mind.

  • dufas_duck

    Plus…this has been tried before. In the late 50s through the early 60s, it was global drought. Scientists wanted funds to break of giant chunks of ice from the poles and tow them back to the continents to supply water.

    In the late 60s to the early 70s, it was global cooling. Some of the scientific plans called for mirrored satellites put into orbit to reflect additional sunlight back to earth or the poles painted with carbon black to absorb more sunlight plus have every building’s roof painted black to heat the structures….

    Now it’s global warming where many of the same scientific and political circles that pronounced past global gloom and doom have climbed aboard the global warming band wagon..

    Then change the name from global warming to ‘climate change’ and no matter what happens, no matter which way the climate goes, debilitating taxes and strangling regulations can be instituted. It has become a heads, warmers win, tails, everyone else loses… It’s like playing three card monty…..

  • OSAMA OBAMA

    Maybe the “chicken little” liberals should all euthanize themselves to save the planet.

  • freedomringsforall

    Amen
    and:
    It is easy to pick a start date that is when the earth is warming up after a little ice age and say that there is global warming.

    Duh of course there is it is in a warming cycle, warming up, for the zillionth time after a zillionth cycle of cooling.

    What ever happened to grade school science class genius intelligence that the earth was sooooo warm millions of years ago (before man ever showed up) that hot steamy forests of fauna and cold blooded animals were prevalent.

    And that zillions of years before that the earth was a hot ball of zillion degree goo and ozz.

    Gees have we lost all common sense.

    For much of the planets life it has been hotter than it has been since the short time man has been around.

    These people that are pushing this man made earth heating are a bunch of con artists going after everyone’s wallet and enslavement.

    They want you to believe that up is down and down is up because they want to enslave you with their scam of carbon taxes.

    Trying to convince everyone that every planet in the universe starts as a zillion degree ball of ooze and eventually cycles hot/cool/hot/cool, to cooler and cooler cycles until a dormant space rock (if it lives an otherwise natural life without a catastrophic collision or sun explosion or something), except of course for this planet. We are doomed to
    start heating up immeasurably and without control because man showed up and is such a driving force that we can outbalance all the cooling and utilize the recourses within the earth to do more harm than all the natural catastrophes of all time.

    Sure that sounds like a really well thought out theory. DUH; not so much really.

    Every living thing has a good percentage of carbon.

    If the very existence of carbon is taxed you are a slave to their new taxation and enslavement scheme.

    So, if they can convince people to believe that carbon is bad in our environment instead of a life giving element from God then they will have convinced people to help them exterminate much of the life on the planet so they can have a more manageable planet slave population.

    I say we demand that the NWO internationalists lead by example and exterminate themselves first as an example of true leadership and let the rest of us decide if we want to follow their example later.

  • The Savage Hombre
  • http://lenbilen.com/ Lennart Bilén

    Thank you David for your insight. I am trying to promote the same idea through this Limerick:

    What then is this “Carbon Pollution”?

    A sinister, evil collusion?

    CO2, it is clean,

    Makes for growth, makes it green,

    A transfer of wealth, a solution.

    The explanation to this Limerick is in:

    http://lenbilen.com/2014/02/22/co2-the-life-giving-gas-not-carbon-pollution-a-limerick-and-explanation/

  • mcsandberg

    Wow, green pests heads are going to be exploding all over. This is what their fiction can’t stand the truth! Thanx!

    Atlas Shrugged was supposed to be a warning, Not A Newspaper!

  • Phillip Maine

    No the current oxygen in W DC is minus 12%, or at least that is the way the lairs act. Any jirk that thinks it is a good thing to start a war with Russia, which they are trying to do is a good thing is way beyond zombified. He is brain dead.

  • IT IT IT IT

    Globalism is nothing but entrenched MAFIA.
    —————Ancient MAFIA.
    ———————–GENOCIDAL MAFIA.
    CHECK OUT those expose interviews with
    California whistleblower —DEBORAH TAVAREZ.

    ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL.

    URGENTLY ESSENTIAL INFO.

    CHECK IT OUT.

    GET IT OUT.

    OUR LIVES NOW DEPEND ON IT.

    WE are dealing with PSYCHOPATHS —in POWER,

  • xsacox

    As a true skeptic i must investigate all sides of an issue. When you truly dig to the bottom it is difficult to put faith in anyone: http://www.skepticalscience.com/david-archibald-exaggerates-solar-influence-on-future-climate-change.html

  • xsacox

    And yes, I’ll look into those making those claims as well.

  • Carbonicus

    Australian Warmunist scientist John Cook’s “skeptical science.com” will give you the prevailing Thermageddon paradigm until you’re nauseated. But as a source for true science you’re in the wrong place.

    Interestingly enough, however, when you plug NASA, NOAA, HadCrut 3/4, RSS, and UAH data sets (those used by all climate scientists worldwide) into Cook’s “SkyTrend” calculator, you find that there has been no statistically significant global warming for 18-23 years, depending on the data set.

    In short, you don’t need to put “faith” in anyone. Empirical data and decades of science among a number of scientific disciplines (e.g. atmospheric chemistry, physics, geology, others) tells you all you need to know.

    Skepticalscience.com? Rudimentary Warmunist propaganda for sheeple with no critical thinking skills too lazy to dig for info.

  • Carbonicus

    Well put. I keep saying we’re living through the prequel to AS.

    Which, as you put it, was not her intent. Her intent was to prevent Sheepleism and prevent this.

    Sad.

  • Poor Debater

    False statements in this article:

    1. “Naturally occurring greenhouse gases ensure that the planet is 30°C warmer than it would otherwise be if they were not in the atmosphere”

    False. The total greenhouse effect is more than 33°C, not 30°.

    2. “so the average temperature of the planet’s surface is 15°C instead of -15°C.”

    False. The non-greenhouse temperature is easily computed from the Stefan-Boltzmann Law at -18.4° (assuming a solar constant of 1364 W/m² and an albedo of 30%).

    3. “Water vapor is responsible for 80 percent of that effect, and carbon dioxide for only 10 percent”

    False. Water vapor is 60% of the total greenhouse effect and CO2 is 26%. (Kiehl, J. T., & Trenberth, K. E. (1997). Earth’s annual global mean energy budget. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 78(2), 197-208.)

    4. “So the approximately 300 parts per million of carbon dioxide is good for 3°C degrees of warming.”

    False. The 280 ppmv of pre-industrial CO2 is actually responsible for 33.4° x 26% = 8.7° of warming. Note how an accumulation of errors above — all in the same direction — leads to a nearly 3x underestimate of CO2′s actual effect.

    5. “The first 20 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere provides 1.6°C of warming, after which the effect drops away rapidly. From the current level of 400 parts per million, each addition of 100 parts per million adds only 0.1°C of warming.”

    So utterly false one has to wonder from which non-peer-reviewed blog “scientist” he cribbed this nonsense. With a sensitivity of 2.8° per 3.7 W/m² the first 20 ppmv of CO2 adds about 3° of warming, and from the current level of 400 ppmv, each additional 100 ppmv adds 0.9°C of warming.

    6. “By the time we have dug up all the rocks we can economically burn, and burned them, we may reach 600 parts per million in the atmosphere. So perhaps we might add another 0.2°C of warming over the next two centuries.”

    Laughably false. You’d get more than that from proven reserves of coal alone, and that’s not counting oil and natural gas. Burning all proven reserves of coal, oil, and gas (based on the figures in BP’s 2013 annual report) would give you 4e11 tons of CO2, which is an additional 518 parts per million by volume of the atmosphere — and that’s ON TOP of the current 400. And since each 100 ppmv gives 0.9°C of warming, that’s 4.7°C of warming — more than 23 times greater than this innumerate author computes.

    Further, that also ignores possible long-term natural feedbacks in the carbon cycle, such as the melting of permafrost and releasing of methane clathrates on the Arctic Ocean floor that may well occur as the planet warms.

    7. “The current Holocene interglacial period might last up to another 3,000 years before the Earth plunges into another glaciation.”

    False. Without human intervention, the next ice age wouldn’t happen for another 50,000 years. (Archer, D., & Ganopolski, A. (2005). A movable trigger: Fossil fuel CO2 and the onset of the next glaciation. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 6(5).) That’s because ice ages and interglacials are triggered by small changes in Earth’s orbit, and as it happens the orbit is becoming less eccentric and the obliquity is also becoming less.

    8. “The flowering plants we rely upon in our diet evolved 100 million years ago when the carbon dioxide level was four times the current concentration.”

    False. Flowering plants as a family first appeared 100 million years ago, but we don’t eat pine trees. What we eat is grain, which are grasses, which didn’t evolve until 10 to 15 million years ago — the Middle Miocene, a period which began with a lowering of CO2 to roughly current levels and cooling of the planet. We’re heading toward a climate vastly different that the one that any grains, any grasses, and any animal that eats grass (think cattle) has ever experienced.

    9. “As the deep oceans turn over, on an eight-hundred-year cycle of circulation, they will take the carbon dioxide now in the atmosphere down into Davy Jones’s Locker, where it will be of no use to man, beast, or plant life.”

    False. That ocean turnover is happening RIGHT NOW, and it always has been. If it had been able to vanish the CO2 that we create at anything like the rate we’re creating it, we wouldn’t be seeing the observed atmospheric increase in CO2.

    10. “Agricultural productivity will rise for the next two centuries or so, along with the atmospheric carbon dioxide level, after which it will fall away.”

    False. For most plants in most places, the limiting factors for growth are water, phosphorus, and nitrogen in that order. Not often will you find carbon being the bottleneck for plant growth, except in greenhouses.

    11. “By the year 3000 AD, the atmosphere’s carbon dioxide level will be only a couple of percent higher than before the Industrial Revolution.”

    False. Even if we only burn half of current fossil fuel reserves — some 2000 gigatons — CO2 would still stay above 400 ppmv for many thousands of years. (Archer, D. (2005). Fate of fossil fuel CO2 in geologic time. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans (1978–2012), 110(C9).)

    12. ““Global warming” is an irrational belief whose proponents demonstrate no interest in examining scientific evidence that may prove their beliefs incorrect.”

    False. I’m happy to examine any scientific evidence skeptics have. The problem is, they don’t have much, and what they do have ranges from equivocal to supportive of the consensus. In fact, note that author David Archibald fails to cite even a single peer-reviewed reference in this disinformation piece. Mr. Archibald also fails to tell his readership that he has been CEO of an oil company.

    12. “The fact that the world has not warmed since 1998 …”

    False. The regression slope of global temperature since 1998 is +1.0°C per century. Positive. That trend is within the range expected from climate models.

  • Unknown Comic

    Actually, the US Government and the Puppet Masters will see this article as dangerous. It will not surprise me when they shut websites like this one down for telling the truth and educating people who don’t drink the Kool-Aid…

  • empty pockets

    They are actually diligently working toward exactly that. The “Shield Law” to “protect” [actual] journalists from the gov’t. They’ve already enacted so many laws that “help” the Constitution and Bill of Rights don’t you know. This one would just “help” the 1st amendment…oh…and give the gov’t just enough opening to begin licensing journalists. So they can “mandate” certain educational standards (far leftist) and impose “licensing fees”. Oh…and control speech. Not “limit” it, you see. No, merely “control” it so crazy people can’t impose their rants on others. Or disagree…er…crazily rant against the powers that be lying to us for their own gain…or “the greater good”. At least as they [the powers that be] see it.
    As Feinstein recently noted, with righteous anger, everybody who thinks they are an “insider” aand exampt…isn’t. Eventually tyranny affects everyone.

  • BarrackHussein

    CO2 as a pollutant? The plants would disagree. Tree huggers are science-illiterate fanatics.