Dear Mr. Lepant,
I think you need some better information than what you have now.
In 2007, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere was 381 ppmV against a 358 ppmV measured in 1995(see the Monthly and annual atmospheric CO2 record from continuous measurements at Jubany Station). The equivalent measured data over Mauna Loa shows that in the 1951 the concentration was 315 ppmV (see Keeling and oth: A three dimensional model of atmospheric CO2 based on observed winds: 1. Analysis of observational data. Aspects of Climate Variability in the Western Pacific and Western Americas,D. Peterson, Ed., Geophysical Monographs, 55, American Geophysical Union). Moreover, estimates show that the concentration in the pre-industrial era was 280 ppmV. Therefore, since this value can be considered as the current “CO2 contribution” higher limit due to non human activity (the contribution on the human activities on the forest during these years has for sure decreased this value) , the total part of the CO2 due to the human activities can be calculated as greater than 25.9% (this number is obtained with the following percentage calculation (381-280)/381 = 0.259) So, the data of 4% that you are showing is incorrect.
The greenhouse effect does not depend from the”CO2 heat capacity” which you refers, but from the fact that the greenhouse gas absorbs the infrared radiation and “reflects” (a quantistic effect) a part of them on the Earth, contributing to the planet warming. CO2 is one of the greatest contributor (with ozone and water vapor) to the absorption, as it was observed by NIMBUS-4 IRIS (see, for example, Liou, An Introduction to Atmospheric Radiation, Academic Press).
The motion in the atmosphere is quite complex, and involves the classical mechanical aspects (hydrostatical equilibrium, etc. etc) together with the aspects of classical thermodynamics applied to heterogeneous mass. It is not explained by the Brownian Motion.
Every policy model, including what you are suggesting, is correct if it respects the environment, and the reduction in the CO2 emission is an important part of a policy. Therefore, I personally encourage all the policy that appropriately reflects that aspect.
Giovanni Macchia
Mottola
Italy
Chi è interessato può seguire il resto o contribuire andando qui
Pensate che si perda tempo con simili farneticazioni? No, perchè pochi forse sanno che in Parlamento alcuni onorevoli hanno firmato un documento che nega il problema dell'effetto serra (anzi, stando a quanto ha scritto Repubblica pare che sostengano che il riscaldamento faccia bene). E negli Stati Uniti, la destra estrema sta portando avanti una battaglia micidiale contro Copenaghen (non per niente, la persona con cui sto discutendo ha anche scritto simili cose su un blog repubblicano).
Sempre all'erta, quindi
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento