Mauna Loa hits 400 PPM of CO2, alarmists wail and gnash teeth, Earth survives

mauna-loa-week

Source: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/weekly.html

Al Gore calls for a day of prayer and reflection, and bothering your neighbor:

So please, take this day and the milestone it represents to reflect on the fragility of our civilization and and the planetary ecosystem on which it depends. Rededicate yourself to the task of saving our future. Talk to your neighbors, call your legislator, let your voice be heard. We must take immediate action to solve this crisis. Not tomorrow, not next week, not next year. Now.

Scientific American laments the plants

This measurement is just the hourly average of CO2 levels high in the Hawaiian sky, but this family’s figures carry more weight than those made at other stations in the world as they have faithfully kept the longest record of atmospheric CO2. Arctic weather stations also hit the hourly 400 ppm mark last spring and this one. Regardless, the hourly levels at Mauna Loa will soon drop as spring kicks in across the northern hemisphere, trees budding forth an army of leaves hungrily sucking CO2 out of the sky.

In the coming year, Scientific American will run an occasional series, “400 ppm,” to examine what this invisible line in the sky means for the global climate, the planet and all the living things on it, including human civilization.

Sorry, we already beat you to it when it comes to summing up what it means:

1what_400_PPM_looks_like

Since the world hasn’t ended (just like what happened with Y2K) we can now go forward from here.

T-shirts saying “I survived 400 PPM” will be made available if there’s enough interest in comments.

UPDATE: T-shirts now available due to popular demand. See here:

The 400 PPM FUD Factory: T-shirts now available

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

292 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Myrrh
May 15, 2013 1:45 pm

Phil – you don’t have rain. What does it matter to you what it is? Don’t worry about it..
The real world has rain in its Carbon Life Cycle because water and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere join to form carbonic acid.
In the real world natural rain is acidic with a pH of 5.6-8.
In the real world it is the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere which gives rain this pH.
In the real world carbon dioxide is being continually washed out of the atmosphere as carbonic acid, the residence time of water in the atmosphere is 8-10 days.
There are two reasons why you don’t have rain in your carbon cycle.
1. Your fantasy world of AGWScienceFiction’s Greenhouse Effect Illusion has no Water Cycle.
In the real world the Water Cycle cools the earth from the 67°C it would be without it, but with the rest of the atmosphere in place which is mainly nitrogen and oxygen, think deserts.
In the real world the thermal blanket around the Earth is the heavy voluminous real gas atmosphere of mainly nitrogen and oxygen, without this, with no atmosphere at all, the Earth would be -18°C
– compare directly with the Moon which has no atmosphere where the equivalent temperature is -23°C
2. Your fantasy world fisics of AGWScienceFiction’s Greenhouse Effect Illusion has pretend gases with no properties and so no processes because they are the imaginary massless ideal gas.
Pre Van der Waals so it makes no sense you quoting equations with volume, your gases have no volume.
Just as it is makes no sense you talking about rain, or clouds..
Your pretend ideal gas molecule which you call carbon dioxide to confuse yourself is called ideal gas, it does not have any other name, only real gases have names.
Your ideal gas which you erroneously call carbon dioxide has no properties so cannot be part and parcel of any process such as the chemical change which in the the real world of real gases with attraction creates carbonic acid when the real gas carbon dioxide and water meet in the atmosphere.
Your ideal gas which you erroneously call carbon dioxide does not change chemically in the atmosphere:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-residence-time.htm
“What really governs the warming potential is how long the extra CO2 remains in the atmosphere. CO2 is essentially chemically inert in the atmosphere and is only removed by biological uptake and by dissolving into the ocean.”
That is the second reason you don’t have rain in your carbon cycle:
your massless ideal gas without attraction and not subject to gravity which you erroneously call carbon dioxide to your own confusion is chemically inert so cannot join with water to form carbonic acid in your empty space atmosphere.
Your fantasy world gets funnier all the time. Your imaginary ideal gas massless molecule which you errroneously call carbon dioxide to your own confusion which can rapidly raise global temperatures several degrees at the beginning of interglacial 800 years into its future magically combines with water in the ocean, but not in the atmosphere.
Gosh, who thought up the fisics for your fantasy world?

Myrrh
May 15, 2013 2:01 pm

Ferdinand, please see my last post to Phil, you’re confusing real world with the fantasy fisics of the AGWScienceFiction’s Greenhouse Effect world.

May 15, 2013 2:11 pm

Myrrh says:
May 15, 2013 at 2:01 pm
Myrrh, can you explain to me why in 1945 physicists did find similar levels of helium between ground level and 25 km height?

milodonharlani
May 15, 2013 2:45 pm

CO2 scavenging by rain:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14971458
Abstract
The CO2 in the atmosphere is in contact with water vapor and rain droplets forming CO2 x H2O, HCO3- and CO3(2-) . Global precipitation is about 505 x 1015 kg/a. Based on theoretical calculation for unpolluted air and measurement observations, we estimated that 100-270 x 10(12) gC/a are scavenged from the air by global precipitation. This roughly equals carbon emissions from volcanic sources or 2-6 per cent of current CO2 emissions. An inventory-based estimate on carbon removal in northwestern Europe supports the above calculation on global scale. With increasing CO2 concentration in the air, precipitation scavenging may increase.

May 15, 2013 4:51 pm

Myrrh says:
May 15, 2013 at 1:45 pm
Phil – you don’t have rain. What does it matter to you what it is? Don’t worry about it..

Really you should stop now, you’re just making yourself look stupid.
The real world has rain in its Carbon Life Cycle because water and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere join to form carbonic acid.
As explained above but apparently beyond you, CO2 and water produce a small amount of bicarbonate ions and hydrogen ions (about 2% of the dissolved CO2 is bicarbonate ion, carbonic acid is trivial by comparison, ~1% of the bicarbonate).
In the real world natural rain is acidic with a pH of 5.6-8.
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut!
In the real world it is the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere which gives rain this pH.
In the real world carbon dioxide is being continually washed out of the atmosphere as carbonic acid, the residence time of water in the atmosphere is 8-10 days.

A very small fraction of the airborne CO2 is washed out as dissolved CO2, limited by the Henry’s Law coefficient.
2. Your fantasy world fisics of AGWScienceFiction’s Greenhouse Effect Illusion has pretend gases with no properties and so no processes because they are the imaginary massless ideal gas.
I don’t know where you get this idea from, ideal gases are comprised of point masses, certainly not massless!
Pre Van der Waals so it makes no sense you quoting equations with volume, your gases have no volume.
It makes no difference whether use the ideal gas law or Van der Waals as your equation of state, you get the same result.
Drivel deleted!
Your ideal gas which you erroneously call carbon dioxide has no properties so cannot be part and parcel of any process such as the chemical change which in the the real world of real gases with attraction creates carbonic acid when the real gas carbon dioxide and water meet in the atmosphere.
This doesn’t happen in the gas phase, only when the CO2 is dissolved in the water drop.
Your fantasy world gets funnier all the time. Your imaginary ideal gas massless molecule which you errroneously call carbon dioxide to your own confusion which can rapidly raise global temperatures several degrees at the beginning of interglacial 800 years into its future magically combines with water in the ocean, but not in the atmosphere.
The confusion is all yours Myrrh!

Myrrh
May 15, 2013 7:27 pm

Oh, I see what’s happening, AGWScienceFiction has to fill this this up with complex sciency sounding gobbledegook to avoid destroying your fantasy that carbon dioxide can accumulate for hundreds and thousands of years in the atmosphere and you so don’t want to give up this fantasy that you’ll even believe that rain water is a solution of bicarb…
As I’ve been trying to tell you, AGWSF has changed the properties and processes of real gases and subsituted basic ideal gas, which doesn’t have attraction. [So it can say that “carbon dioxide diffuses into the atmosphere at great speeds bouncing off the other ideal gases in elastic collisions, no attraction, ..and so thoroughly mixing it can’t be unmixed” .]
The real gas water vapour, I’ve been calling it simply water here because I’ve been talking about both fluids together, the fluid gas water vapour and the fluid liquid water, combines with the fluid gas carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to form carbonic acid. This goes on to form rain drops and ice and precipates out – this is what gives normal rain (not acid rain) its mildly acid pH.
http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/69687.html
“Atmospheric Deposition and Acid Rain
The Problem…
Acidic deposition, or acid rain, originates from the combustion of fossil fuels. When coal, oil, or other fossil fuels are burned, acid rain precursors–mainly nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (SO2)–are emitted into the atmosphere. Once in the atmosphere, NOx and SO2 are transformed into nitric acid and sulfuric acid and fall back to earth through both wet deposition such as rain, snow, fog, cloud water, and dry deposition of acids attached to particles, gases and aerosols. Rain and snow are somewhat naturally acidic due to the combining of carbon dioxide and water vapor in the air, which forms weak carbonic acid. However, the average acidity of rainfall in New York State is up to 30 times greater than the level typically found in rainwater.”
“Rain and snow are somewhat naturally acidic due to the combining of carbon dioxide and water vapor in the air, which forms weak carbonic acid.”
As I’ve said, in what to me is your strange world this doesn’t happen because your ideal gas, which you erroneously call carbon dioxide, does not undergo any chemical changes in the atmosphere because chemically inert – as I quoted from SkepticalScience.
In the real world, the real gases carbon dioxide and water vapour are greatly attracted to each other and spontaneously form carbon acid so rain and snow and fog and dew – that’s how your iron garden furniture rusts.., how mountains are weathered down..
http://step.nn.k12.va.us/science/ES/req_labs/S07_Acid_Rain.doc
“BackgroundWater vapor in the air can combine with other gases found in the air. You may be surprised to learn that rain water is slightly acidic. One reason is that water vapor can combine with carbon dioxide gas to form carbonic acid. The natural pH value of rain water is usually between 6.0 and 6.9. Rainfall accumulates in rivers and streams causing a slight acidification.
“Other gases found in the air can also combine with water vapor to form “acid rain”. For example, gases in automobile exhaust and other gases given off by combustion of fossil fuels can combine with water vapor to form sulfurous acid, nitrous acid, and nitric acid.
“Carbonic acid is formed when carbon dioxide gas (CO2) dissolves in rain droplets of unpolluted air: CO2(g) + H2O(l) =====> H2CO3(aq) Nitrous acid and nitric acid result from a common air pollutant, nitrogen dioxide (NO2). Most nitrogen dioxide in our atmosphere is produced from automobile exhaust. Nitrogen dioxide gas dissolves in rain drops and forms nitrous and nitric acid: ”
You cannot say that this is something I’m making up.. Though his pH for rain is a tad high.
You can of course choose to ignore it, but you are arguing with government and education sources, I expect you as scientists to take me seriously.
I am trying to show you how the AGW narrative has changed the basic physical properties and processes of the natural world around us which traditional physics is still teaching.
The AGW claim that “carbon dioixide accumulates for hundreds and thousands of years in the atmosphere” is simply not possible in our natural world where water flows downhill and heat always flows from hotter to colder, spontaneously is a given because this about work, it takes work to change that.
I posted a link earlier to show how you have no rain in the AGW carbon cycle, if you are seriously arguing with me, and with the two sources I’ve just quoted, I should be grateful you to read it from the point of view of my perspective which comes from traditional physics.
No rain in the carbon cycle creates as ‘static’ world, the dynamic energy flows are missing from the picture. There are no natural cycles between the “sinks”. For example, because you don’t have water vapour and liquid water combining in the atmosphere the description of weathering of rocks is ‘stilted’, these sinks get carbon dioxide only in the immediate surface around them, you don’t have rain weathering them.
You don’t notice this ‘flat’ picture, because you haven’t been taught the dynamic processes of winds and rain, these have all been taken out of the picture, the arrows from one to the other as if in a cycle have no dynamic energy flowing in them, all you’ve got left is the arrows – plants for example have their stomata on the underside of their leaves, in the warmth of growing conditions when the land becomes heated this is the direction from which they get their carbon dioxide and water required for photosynthesis. They don’t get it from contact with the “well-mixed” background above them..
..unless they’re water lilies..
Anyway, I think I’ve shown enough of the differences here to give you some idea of the point I’ve been trying to make, if you’re interested in engaging with what I’m actually saying.., otherwise, chow, it’s been an enlightening discussion for me.

May 15, 2013 11:21 pm

milodonharlani says:
May 15, 2013 at 2:45 pm
CO2 scavenging by rain:
Thanks a lot! I was looking for the global rain data for a long time…
Ferdinand

May 15, 2013 11:59 pm

Myrrh says:
May 15, 2013 at 7:27 pm
the fluid gas water vapour and the fluid liquid water, combines with the fluid gas carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to form carbonic acid.
Myrrh, you only fool yourself. Carbonic acid doesn’t exist in vapour form. It only exists in liquid water and even then only at 1% of all forms of CO2 present in the liquid. The first paragraph is simply wrong, but as you can see in the picture, CO2 gas is dissolving in the liquid water drop and there forms carbonic acid which further dissociates in bicarbonate and carbonate + hydrogen ions, which makes the water slightly acid:
Carbonic acid is formed when carbon dioxide gas (CO2) dissolves in rain droplets of unpolluted air:
CO2(g) + H2O(l) =====> H2CO3(aq)
Note the (l), not (g) after H2O.
Further, see the message from milodonharlani with the calculations of the amounts of CO2 scavenged by rain out of the atmosphere (confirmed by real world tests): 2-6% of the human emissions per year. Thus rain is only removing a small part of the human emissions, far from scavenging all natural + human CO2 out of the atmosphere.
And I still am waiting for your explanation of why helium percentages in the atmosphere up to 25 km height only slightly differ from these at ground level, while helium is some 9 times lighter than air…

Myrrh
May 16, 2013 4:09 am

It’s still water, you’re being confused by arguments created by the AGWScienceFiction’s meme producing department.., water vapour is just a phase of water, it hasn’t become something different..
Look at my last post link, snow is acidic, it’s still water.
“This is the perfect illustration of rule (b). Technically and officially, “water” refers to the H2O molecule in any phase (gas, liquid, or solid) … but unofficially by long tradition “water” connotes the liquid unless otherwise specified. Water is normally a liquid.” http://www.av8n.com/physics/vapor.htm
Water vapour is still H2O.
That (g) and (l) is redundant.. Just as there is no “net” in the second law, AGWSF put that in for its “backradiation” arguments. [“Spontaneously” is intrinsic to the second law, just like water always flows downhill doesn’t have to be said, “except when work is done to change that..”, so, heat always flows from hotter to colder, just as spontaneously as water flowing downhill. There are not bits of water flowing up to get a net of water always flowing down.. Then of course they try to bamboozle with “quantum” as if “photons” are somehow different from matter.. just as here they’ve made water vapour different from water.. Well, at least you don’t have a problem anymore with ocean acidification…
I really don’t know how better to explain this is a scam created out of tweaking real physics; misusing terms, giving the properties of one thing to another, taking laws and processes out of context. These are sleights of hand, using all the techniques of magic tricks to con into seeing something that isn’t there..
Water vapour in the atmosphere is water, carbon dioxide combines with that to form carbonic acid which gives water its pH of 5.6-8 and these combined together go on together in the other phases of water, condensing to liquid, as in rain and fog and clouds, and solid, ice and snow.
Carbon dioxide also combines with liquid and solid water in atmosphere direct, same thing. Falling rain will be attracting any carbon dioxide it meets – water is the great lover in the natural world readily taking into solution..
I really do not appreciate you throwing in strawmen arguments about helium which I have neither the time nor the inclination to check out. If these argument “rebuttals” I get from AGW/CAGWs is anything to go by, I will find something in them that shows this has been taken out of context. If you want to use that as an argument, you come up with all the necessary details, otherwise, give it rest..
As an example, I was not so long ago in a discussion about the heat capacity of carbon dioxide, it is in the real world practically zilch, it releases any heat it absorbs instantly, therefore, it cannot “trap” heat, or “store” heat, it has a lower heat capacity than nitrogen and oxygen.
(Compare with water which has a very high heat capacity, that is, it takes in a lot of heat energy before it changes temperature which it shows by phase change and it takes longer to heat up than something with a lower heat capacity and takes the same time to give up its heat which is what trapping/storing heat really is – that’s how the great heat of 67°C of the Earth without water comes down to 15°C, by the water evaporating in phase change and taking this great heat into the top of the atmosphere where it releases it to the cold and condenses back to liquid water or ice.
That’s why a simple air conditioning system in hot countries is to have a bowl of water in the room.., a fountain in the middle of a courtyard, and why a cold damp room heated will still feel cold and damp longer because water takes longer to change its temperature, so, either pump in more heat because you have to heat the water too, or put in a de-humidifier which will extract the water which is swallowing up all the heat.. So, note, cold clouds aren’t radiating heat, they’re still swallowing up what they can if there’s any around to get, and, when they get full up they won’t be radiating it out they will be changing phase, turning back to water vapour and so becoming less dense as they expand and lighter than air will evaporate, rising higher in the atmosphere.).
So, I was told that carbon dioxide had a higher heat capacity than nitrogen and oxygen and as I knew this was false I asked for the figures – he gave me figures which when I looked up I saw related to temperatures in the thousands of degrees centigrade.., duh, when carbon dioxide’s heat capacity creeps above that of the oxygen and nitrogen – totally irrelevant and out of context, but this is the method AGWSF uses to add confusion to this subject so you think you know what you’re saying by repeating them but they’re only distracting you from what they are trying to hide by using a context not applicable.
What they are hiding is they have no rain in their carbon cycle.
All water in the atmosphere absorbs carbon dioxide spontaneously, this is one of the amazing properties of water, there is spontaneous attraction between water in whatever phase it’s in and carbon dioxide and this is what gives all water in the atmosphere in every phase an acid pH, which is how all unpolluted natural rain is acidic, from the attraction between them, from carbon dioxide making water acidic. It is acidic in the atmosphere and acidic on reaching the ground.
Water vapour is still water and rain does not become alkaline, there is no dissociation into bicarbs. That it can do so, which is what makes it an acid, does not mean that it is what it is doing. Or measurements of the pH of rainwater would not show it to be an acid.

May 16, 2013 4:55 am

Myrrh says:
May 16, 2013 at 4:09 am
All water in the atmosphere absorbs carbon dioxide spontaneously
Simply said: not at all in gaseous form. It is the reverse: carbonic acid immediately decomposes if another molecule of water passes by. As there is far more water vapour in the atmosphere than CO2, there is virtually no carbonic acid in gas form present:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbonic_acid
Theoretical calculations show that the presence of even a single molecule of water causes carbonic acid to revert to carbon dioxide and water.
Water vapour is still water and rain does not become alkaline, there is no dissociation into bicarbs.
Again, you are painfully demonstrating your complete lack of knowledge of chemistry: something is an acid in water, if the number of hydrogen ions is higher then 10^-7, or lower than pH 7, where
pH = – log[H+]
Thus, you don’t have an acid if there are no (extra) hydrogen ions, which is the case for CO2 or H2CO3, until they are dissolved in water and dissociate (split) into bicarbonate ions and hydrogen ions. It is just the dissociation in water which transforms CO2 via H2CO3 into an acid.
You are still confusing bicarbonate salts which mostly are alkaline in solution with bicarbonate ions> which do not contribute to acidity or alkalinity.
If you put a (dry!) pH meter in pure CO2 (liquid or gas) it will not show anything, neither for H2CO3, I suppose, because that is hard to make in pure form.

May 16, 2013 5:08 am

Myrrh says:
May 15, 2013 at 7:27 pm
Oh, I see what’s happening, AGWScienceFiction has to fill this this up with complex sciency sounding gobbledegook to avoid destroying your fantasy that carbon dioxide can accumulate for hundreds and thousands of years in the atmosphere and you so don’t want to give up this fantasy that you’ll even believe that rain water is a solution of bicarb…

This is absolutely nothing to do with AGW it’s just basic Chemistry! Rainwater is a solution of CO2 in water with about 2% of the CO2 in the form of bicarbonate ion and the same amount of H+ which is what makes it acidic. High school level chemistry.
As I’ve been trying to tell you, AGWSF has changed the properties and processes of real gases and subsituted basic ideal gas, which doesn’t have attraction. [So it can say that “carbon dioxide diffuses into the atmosphere at great speeds bouncing off the other ideal gases in elastic collisions, no attraction, ..and so thoroughly mixing it can’t be unmixed” .]
Fundamental Physical chemistry, kinetic theory of gases, absolutely nothing to do with AGW!
The real gas water vapour, I’ve been calling it simply water here because I’ve been talking about both fluids together, the fluid gas water vapour and the fluid liquid water, combines with the fluid gas carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to form carbonic acid. This goes on to form rain drops and ice and precipates out – this is what gives normal rain (not acid rain) its mildly acid pH.
Yes you have been sloppy in your use of the nomenclature, CO2 and H2O react in solution i.e. in the liquid phase of water not in the gas phase. (There had been speculation for years as to whether carbonic acid could even exist in the gas phase but it was finally detected in lab experiments conducted at very low temperatures and very carefully warmed up to -30ºC!
“The Austrian researchers have now demonstrated that carbonic acid can exist in the gas phase and that it is stable at temperatures up to –30 °C. For these experiments, solid carbonic acid was formed by means of acid-base reactions at very low temperatures and then warmed to –30 °C. The evaporating molecules were trapped in a matrix of the noble gas argon and then immediately cooled again. This resulted in a kind of frozen “image” of the gas-phase carbonic acid, which the researchers were able to study by infrared spectrometry.”
Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2010-12-carbonic-acid-isolated-gas-phase.html)
“Rain and snow are somewhat naturally acidic due to the combining of carbon dioxide and water vapor in the air, which forms weak carbonic acid.”
As I’ve said, in what to me is your strange world this doesn’t happen because your ideal gas, which you erroneously call carbon dioxide, does not undergo any chemical changes in the atmosphere because chemically inert – as I quoted from SkepticalScience.
In the real world, the real gases carbon dioxide and water vapour are greatly attracted to each other and spontaneously form carbon acid so rain and snow and fog and dew – that’s how your iron garden furniture rusts.., how mountains are weathered down..
http://step.nn.k12.va.us/science/ES/req_labs/S07_Acid_Rain.doc
“BackgroundWater vapor in the air can combine with other gases found in the air. You may be surprised to learn that rain water is slightly acidic. One reason is that water vapor can combine with carbon dioxide gas to form carbonic acid. The natural pH value of rain water is usually between 6.0 and 6.9. Rainfall accumulates in rivers and streams causing a slight acidification.
“Other gases found in the air can also combine with water vapor to form “acid rain”. For example, gases in automobile exhaust and other gases given off by combustion of fossil fuels can combine with water vapor to form sulfurous acid, nitrous acid, and nitric acid.
“Carbonic acid is formed when carbon dioxide gas (CO2) dissolves in rain droplets of unpolluted air: CO2(g) + H2O(l) =====> H2CO3(aq)

Correct but incomplete, as written this would be neutral, pH 7, acids are acidic because they dissociate to produce H+, the next step is the dissociation into HCO3- and H+.
You cannot say that this is something I’m making up.. Though his pH for rain is a tad high.
You can of course choose to ignore it, but you are arguing with government and education sources, I expect you as scientists to take me seriously.

I don’t care where the material comes from it contains errors, I can’t take you seriously because of the unscientific nonsense you write, your errors on the physics of gases and chemical reactions for instance.
I am trying to show you how the AGW narrative has changed the basic physical properties and processes of the natural world around us which traditional physics is still teaching.
What you’re talking about has absolutely not been changed by AGW, it’s basic standard physical chemistry which has been around far at least a century!
The AGW claim that “carbon dioixide accumulates for hundreds and thousands of years in the atmosphere” is simply not possible in our natural world where water flows downhill and heat always flows from hotter to colder, spontaneously is a given because this about work, it takes work to change that.
I posted a link earlier to show how you have no rain in the AGW carbon cycle, if you are seriously arguing with me, and with the two sources I’ve just quoted, I should be grateful you to read it from the point of view of my perspective which comes from traditional physics.

No it doesn’t, the kinetic theory of gases which you are disputing is traditional physics!
Anyway, I think I’ve shown enough of the differences here to give you some idea of the point I’ve been trying to make, if you’re interested in engaging with what I’m actually saying.., otherwise, chow, it’s been an enlightening discussion for me.
Actually I get the impression that you’re still on the same track so you haven’t been enlightened at all!

May 16, 2013 5:25 am

Myrrh says:
May 16, 2013 at 4:09 am
Water vapour is still H2O.
That (g) and (l) is redundant.
.
It certainly is not, the conditions for reaction in the two phases are totally different, vastly different concentrations and greater organization in the liquid phase due to hydrogen bonding.
Water vapour in the atmosphere is water, carbon dioxide combines with that to form carbonic acid which gives water its pH of 5.6-8 and these combined together go on together in the other phases of water, condensing to liquid, as in rain and fog and clouds, and solid, ice and snow.
Only happens in the liquid phase as the subscript ‘l’ shows.
Carbon dioxide also combines with liquid and solid water in atmosphere direct, same thing. Falling rain will be attracting any carbon dioxide it meets – water is the great lover in the natural world readily taking into solution.
exactly, ‘in solution’.
As an example, I was not so long ago in a discussion about the heat capacity of carbon dioxide, it is in the real world practically zilch, it releases any heat it absorbs instantly, therefore, it cannot “trap” heat, or “store” heat, it has a lower heat capacity than nitrogen and oxygen.
No it does not, at 25ºC the molar heat capacities are: CO2 36.94, N2 29.12, O2 29.38, H20(g) 37.47 (at 100ºC)
(Compare with water which has a very high heat capacity, that is, it takes in a lot of heat energy before it changes temperature which it shows by phase change and it takes longer to heat up than something with a lower heat capacity and takes the same time to give up its heat which is what trapping/storing heat really is – that’s how the great heat of 67°C of the Earth without water comes down to 15°C, by the water evaporating in phase change and taking this great heat into the top of the atmosphere where it releases it to the cold and condenses back to liquid water or ice.
That’s the latent heat at phase changes not the heat capacity, which for the two triatomic gases is similar.
All water in the atmosphere absorbs carbon dioxide spontaneously, this is one of the amazing properties of water, there is spontaneous attraction between water in whatever phase it’s in and carbon dioxide and this is what gives all water in the atmosphere in every phase an acid pH, which is how all unpolluted natural rain is acidic, from the attraction between them, from carbon dioxide making water acidic. It is acidic in the atmosphere and acidic on reaching the ground.
As pointed out above totally wrong!
Water vapour is still water and rain does not become alkaline, there is no dissociation into bicarbs. That it can do so, which is what makes it an acid, does not mean that it is what it is doing. Or measurements of the pH of rainwater would not show it to be an acid.
That dissociation is exactly what makes it an acid, just like all other acids!

May 16, 2013 5:44 am

Myrrh says:
May 16, 2013 at 4:09 am
an example, I was not so long ago in a discussion about the heat capacity of carbon dioxide, it is in the real world practically zilch, it releases any heat it absorbs instantly, therefore, it cannot “trap” heat, or “store” heat, it has a lower heat capacity than nitrogen and oxygen.
Not to disturb the other discussion, but I have seen several deep freeze installations working with CO2 as refrigerant. Seems to me that that only is possible if CO2 has a quite good heat capacity…

Myrrh
May 16, 2013 11:31 am

Shrug.

May 17, 2013 12:03 am

Myrrh says:
May 16, 2013 at 11:31 am
Shrug.
OK that it is for this time. You have convincingly demonstrated that you don’t know anything about physics of gases and don’t have even the most elementary knowledge of chemistry.
Not a problem for me, or for you, but worse is that you are not willing to accept anything from people who know what they are talking about on these subjects. It is that attitude that gives all sceptics a bad name.
See you next time…

1 10 11 12