What 400 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere looks like

The results are in, and it looks like this.

1what_400_PPM_looks_like

UPDATE: By popular request, our representative to the “Union of Concerned Scientists” has been added to panel #2 at top. – Anthony

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
DavidG

At the height of the last glaciation Carbon was 4000 ppm, end of story.

Otter

Be that your pooch?

albertalad

Wow! 400 ppm. Then I better put a warning here. To those of you from southern locations visiting us up north for the first time, those dancing lights in the night sky is NOT the world burning up. Those are Northern Lights. Nothing to panic over. That is very normal.

Janice Moore

Dogs RULE!
Heh, heh, thanks for the chuckle, An–th–y (so won’t go to Spam bin).
Aaand, What Algore THINKS (vs. merely “says”) it looks like = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

milodonharlani


A little dated & not a Topher-quality on screen performance, but still valid.

The smile on the plants is the best part.

Toby Nixon

Well, Y2K really DID have the potential for a lot of systems to fail — but people mobilized, lots of old COBOL programmers went to work, “year” fields in databases and software were expanded to four digits, and it ended up having virtually no impact at all (although I did convince my wife to install a 20KVA natural-gas generator in the backyard “just in case” :-).
CO2 at 400ppm has NO such potential, and so to compare it to Y2K is really giving it more credit than it deserves.

Janice Moore

Thanks for sharing the nicely done video — it gets its point across just fine.
BUT….. those tiny red things are MAGIC BEANS and, well, you know what MAGIC can do. @_@ Mm, hm. Pretty much anything.
LOL

milodonharlani

DavidG says:
May 7, 2013 at 4:23 pm
———————————
Not sure what you mean, David, but the last glacial advance ended around just 11,400 years ago, although technically we’re still in a glacial period of geologic history. Ppm of CO2 at the last glacial maximum (c. 20,000 ya) was near plant starvation level of 150 (maybe 190 ppm).
There have been other glaciations since CO2 was as high as 4000 ppm. I wonder if you’re thinking of the Ordovician Glaciation, which may have started with CO2 as high as 8000 ppm. During the Carboniferous/Permian glaciation, it was higher than during the Pleistocene, but by how much is controversial. One estimate is as low as 313-344 ppm.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12235372

Janice Moore

Thank you to (oops!) — MILODON HARLANI!

milodonharlani

You’re welcome. They’re magic because released by evil humans.

Mike McMillan

Toby Nixon says: May 7, 2013 at 4:36 pm
…(although I did convince my wife to install a 20KVA natural-gas generator in the backyard “just in case” :-).

Stroke of genius, that. Did you tell her you needed some tools, to go along with it?

James at 48

This morning it felt chilly but now it feels nice.

Lawrence Jenkins

David G
Any links on that info about co2 4000 ppm at the end of the last glaciation, I haven’t heard that before.
Thanks

what it looks like in the data chart depends entirely on the scale used.

petermue

Guess what happens at 666 ppm of CO2 (in case of someone survives the 400 ppm)!

Imagine a square meter (1,000,000mm) one millimeter thick. Now color the square millimeter free space around each of the 400 CO2 molecules so you can see what it looks like to a photon traveling at the speed of light. Also, consider what the probability of that photon actually striking one of those molecules rather than passing through the free space or non-absorbing gas molecules.Then continue the process through the millions of such air thicknesses that are expanding in volumn with altitude. Now introduce water vapor and all those other photons and you may be able to imagine a model that may give you some idea of the possible effect of CO2 on the rate of energy loss to space.

Lew Skannen

Was that just some random unqualified dog or was that an esteemed member of the Union of Concerned and Bedwetting Scientists?

Looks like warmer weather in Kalamazoo, MI, than in Richmond, VA, leaves bursting from twigs, flowers in bloom, clear water in the lakes and lots of bugs collecting on the front of the car. If that is climate disaster, I’ll take it. If it is just a warm spell, I’ll just enjoy it.

Tom J

Did anyone notice those brilliant red eyes on Hansen’s picture?
Hmmm.

Anthony, it’s worse than I thought. I had a sinus headache when I awoke this morning, and it’s persisted all day. Must’ve been caused by 400ppm. [sarc off]

Bob Diaz

I believe that for plants the ideal point is around 1,000 to 2,000 PPM depending on the plant. Above that the plant can process any more CO2. Thus as we go above 400 PPM, plants continue to do better in terms of growth. Simple logic says that as we go higher in CO2, the plants create a negative feedback system to lower the CO2 level. After all, increased growth results in more plant material pulling CO2 from the air.
This does raise an interesting point, IF we go above 2,000 PPM, wouldn’t the increased CO2 avoid the negative feedback increase from plants? Now that we should worry, it would take a long long time to reach that point.

Bob Diaz

Sorry, typo – Above that the plant can NOT process any more CO2.

Jimbo

400ppm!!! Pffft. 450ppm pffft. Here are the devastating effects of over 1,200ppm. This is why those vegetarian dinosaurs of the Jurassic could not find any vegetation to eat. This is why the biosphere is greeningnot. Grrrrr!

“Effects of Rapid Global Warming at the Paleocene-Eocene Boundary on Neotropical Vegetation”
“….We observed a rapid and distinct increase in plant diversity and origination rates, with a set of new taxa, mostly angiosperms, added to the existing stock of low-diversity Paleocene flora. There is no evidence for enhanced aridity in the northern Neotropics. …”
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1193833

Please avert your eyes.
http://youtu.be/K_477VxU-WI

John Parsons

DavidG says:
May 7, 2013 at 4:23 pm
“At the height of the last glaciation Carbon was 4000 ppm, end of story.”
Wrong.
The Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) was between 26,500 and 19,000–20,000 years ago, and CO2 was not only not 4000 ppm, it was far below today’s value.
The last time carbon dioxide levels were as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland,” according to UCLA’s department of Earth and space sciences and the department of atmospheric and oceanic sciences.
JP
[You are reminded: Use only ONE login_id per email address. Mod]

Jimbo

Co2 at 400ppm or 500ppm or even 900ppm will cause total madness. These people must think we are idiots.

“…a 30-minute exposure at 50,000 ppm produces signs of intoxication,… ”
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/idlh/124389.html

By the way, 10 times the current level of co2 failed to stop the Ordovician ice age.

Jimbo

John Parsons, please see:
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/PageMill_Images/image277.gif
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html
Your points are invalidated by the paleo evidence. You may wish to proceed but there will be more to follow where I leave off. I am going to bed now as it is 1am for me. Think before you leap.

SAMURAI

What does 400ppm look like?
For many farmers in the Northern Hemisphere, it means one of the coldest and longest winters in recorded history, delayed planting, greatly reduced crop yields, higher crop prices and for consumers, higher food prices.
It also means record late “Spring” snowstorms in Canada and the US and it means I’m still wearing my winter jacket as of May 08 on the beach south of Tokyo, when I usually need to be running my air-conditioner by this time of the year…..
When I mention this to friends, they simply mention the old bromide that, “weather isn’t climate”. When I reply that there hasn’t been any statistically significant warming into the 17th year, my friends reply with the new meme, “The last 10 years are ranked the highest in human history! What am I talking about?”
And so it goes…..until it doesn’t….

atarsinc

Bob Diaz says:
May 7, 2013 at 5:54 pm
Bob, Your figures may be right for some plants, but certainly not all. Additionally, plants only do better with more CO2 if there is a concomitant rise in water and sunlight. How plants react to increased CO2 is inextricably related to many climate factors. The University of Arizona has done some great research on the subject that you might be interested in.
Like all Earth systems, it’s way more complicated than saying plants like more CO2. JP

David L. Hagen

Three cheers for CO2 – more plant food to help the 2 billion desperately poor and the 1 billion extremely poor to feed themselves.
US Congress’ mandating corn to fuel is starving the extremely poor. ~192,000 in 2010 and more since.
Indur Goklany, Could Biofuel Policies Increase Death and Disease in Developing Countries

The National Academy of Sciences estimated that globally biofuels expansion accounted for 20-40% of the price increases seen in 2007-8, when prices of many food crops doubled. Net-food-importing developing countries were particularly hard-hit. In an earlier paper, we estimated that from 2006-2011 U.S. ethanol expansion cost Mexico about $1.5 billion due to ethanol-related corn price increases. Here we apply the same methodology to estimate the global impacts. We estimate the six-year costs to net corn importing countries at $11.6 billion, with developing countries absorbing more than half of those costs. We examine the negative impacts on the poor in net corn exporting countries. We recommend reforms to U.S. biofuels policies.. . .
A number of Arab and Northern African countries that have experienced social unrest in recent years – Egypt, Syria, Tunisia, Libya – also experienced high ethanol-related costs, perhaps an indicator of the contribution of rising food prices to political instability. . . .
With poverty rates at 65% and extreme poverty at 38%, there is little question that U.S. ethanol expansion contributes to poverty and food insecurity in this net corn exporting country (Uganda), albeit in ways that are difficult to quantify because of the difficulties associated with estimating price transmission accurately.. . .
If the U.S. ethanol mandate is effectively taking back the value of U.S. food and agricultural assistance to developing countries, then U.S. biofuels policies are potentially undermining our own aid goals.

Timothy A. Wise, The Cost to Developing Countries of U.S. Corn Ethanol Expansion, GDAE Working Paper No. 12-02, October 2012
Conclusion: “Green policy” = Fatten the rich to starve the poor to buy votes.

Brian R

Here’s another way to look at it.
Atmosphere = 100%. CO2 = 0.0004% (about as much interest my bank is currently paying on a savings account). It has increased 0.00005% in the last 150 years or an average of 0.00000033% per year.

atarsinc

fhhaynie says
FH, you don’t need to model every atom of water in a tea kettle to know it gets hot when you put it on the stove. JP

atarsinc

Brian R says:
May 7, 2013 at 6:19 pm
“Here’s another way to look at it.”
And here’s another: Your cup of tea=99.99% H2O, Ricin= .0004%. Your dead. JP

atarsinc

Jimbo says
Think before you sleep. JP

atarsinc

Jumbo, By the way, I personally corresponded with Dr. Berner about the outdated (his words) graph of his that you showed. He said that we have learned that the values shown are far from those of research done since his work years ago. Talk to him yourself. he’s a nice guy. JP

atarsinc

Sorry Jimbo, Spellcheck did that not me. JP

KevinK

John Parsons wrote;
“The last time carbon dioxide levels were as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland,”
CORRELATION is such a cool toy, like a Frisbee ™ but so much more powerful, I don’t remember anybody predicting if it will rain tomorrow based on were the Frisbee landed today.
So far for every day of my adult life the Sun was up within an hour or two (plus or minus a tad bit) of the time I woke up. You should all be grateful I am an early riser. I would hate to see you all in the dark until I woke up. Oh jeeeze what happens if I ever switch to the night shift ? /sarc off
Cheers, Kevin

atarsinc says:
May 7, 2013 at 6:24 pm
Brian R says:
May 7, 2013 at 6:19 pm
“Here’s another way to look at it.”
And here’s another: Your cup of tea=99.99% H2O, Ricin= .0004%. Your dead. JP

Ricin is a deadly toxin. CO2 is essential for life; lots more is fine. You’re [correct construction] a troll.
/Mr Lynn

Go into a greenhouse (a real one, where veggies, not AGW nut cases, are grown) enriched to 1,500 ppm CO2 . What does that look like?

andy

Maybe it could have another box, “what the global thermometer thinks …” showing the IPCC temp models vs data. Perhaps lengthwise, along the bottom.

@David Hagen –
192,000 dead sounds like mass murder to me (that ain’t all – just 2010 alone).
The ethanol program proceeds from global warming alarmism.
Global warming alarmism is mass murder.
Therefore, the ethanol program is mass murder.
Global warming alarmists are mass murderers.
They should be dealt with accordingly.

andy

And what the EU carbon price thinks it looks like, as an exploding bomb, if you need another box to balance.

atarsinc

KevinK says
I won’t pretend to understand all of your “sarcasm”. But regarding the correlation: THAT was the topic. David brought up the correlation and I showed that THAT correlation was incorrect.
JP

nick

data doesnt ‘look like’ that. you need from zero on vertical axis to see ‘looks like’

atarsinc

Chad Wozniak says: Global Warming Alarmists are “mass murders” and should be “dealt with accordingly”. Pray tell, Chad, how would you suggest they be “dealt with”? JP

Robert in Calgary

A link I’ve provided before….
http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-077.htm
“Ambient CO2 level in outside air is about 340 ppm by volume. All plants grow well at this level but as CO2 levels are raised by 1,000 ppm photosynthesis increases proportionately resulting in more sugars and carbohydrates available for plant growth. Any actively growing crop in a tightly clad greenhouse with little or no ventilation can readily reduce the CO2 level during the day to as low as 200 ppm. The decrease in photosynthesis when CO2 level drops from 340 ppm to 200 ppm is similar to the increase when the CO2 levels are raised from 340 to about 1,300 ppm (Figure 1). As a rule of thumb, a drop in carbon dioxide levels below ambient has a stronger effect than supplementation above ambient.
During particular times of the year in new greenhouses, and especially in double-glazed structures that have reduced air exchange rates, the carbon dioxide levels can easily drop below 340 ppm which has a significant negative effect on the crop. Ventilation during the day can raise the CO2 levels closer to ambient but never back to ambient levels of 340 ppm. Supplementation of CO2 is seen as the only method to overcome this deficiency and increasing the level above 340 ppm is beneficial for most crops.
The level to which the CO2 concentration should be raised depends on the crop, light intensity, temperature, ventilation, stage of the crop growth and the economics of the crop. For most crops the saturation point will be reached at about 1,000–1,300 ppm under ideal circumstances. A lower level (800–1,000 ppm) is recommended for raising seedlings (tomatoes, cucumbers and peppers) as well as for lettuce production. Even lower levels (500–800 ppm) are recommended for African violets and some Gerbera varieties. Increased CO2 levels will shorten the growing period (5%–10%), improve crop quality and yield, as well as, increase leaf size and leaf thickness. The increase in yield of tomato, cucumber and pepper crops is a result of increased numbers and faster flowering per plant.”

kadaka (KD Knoebel)

400 parts per million:
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXOXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Manfred

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818112001658#gr1
The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature
Humluma et al. Global and Planetary Change Volume 100, January 2013, Pages 51–69
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2012.08.008
It seems the phase relation grows daily tighter?

atarsinc

Mr Lynn says:
The point is not that ricin is healthy. The point is: assuming that, because the absolute value of a substance is small, it is therefore inconsequential, is not a good assumption.
Someone is not a “troll” just because you disagree with their position. I won’t call you names. I would appreciate the same courtesy. JP

Jimmy Haigh.

400ppm? Let’s get pished!