1 Year of CO2 Daily and Weekly Means – Mauna Loa:
5 Year Global Monthly Mean CO2:
5 Year Mauna Loa Monthly Mean CO2:
7 Year Alert, Canada Daily CO2
1996 to Present, Mauna Loa CO2 and Period Of Pause In Each Temperature Record:
1985 to 2009 Alert, Canada CO2 Concentrations:
1979 to Present Global Average CO2 and Growth Rate:
1975 – Present Mauna Loa CO2:
1973 to Present Monthly Mean Carbon Dioxide
1960 to Present Mauna Loa CO2 Growth Rate
1959 to Present Mauna Loa CO2
1957 to Present Mauna Loa Monthly Mean Carbon Dioxide
1900 to 2011 Cumulative CO2 Concentration, Anthropogenic CO2 Emissions and Temperature
1850 to Present Observed Total CO2 Concentration:
1830 to Present, Law Dome, Antarctica CO2 Mixing Ratio
1750 To Present Observed Total CO2 Concentration:
1740 to Present CO2
1000 to Present Law Dome, Antarctica, CO2 Mixing Ratio
1000 to Present Law Dome, Antarctica, CO2 Mixing Ratio
10,700 years – GISP2 – Temperature with CO2 from EPICA DomeC
160,000 to 1996 CO2 Concentration
400,000 to Present Vostok, Antarctica, CO2 Cocentration
Anthropogenic CO2 Emissions By Source
1990 – 2013 Global Fossil Fuel and Cement Emissions
1750 – 2010 Global CO2 Emissions from Fossil-Fuels:
1750 – 2010 Global CO2 Emissions from Fossil-Fuels By Contributors:
1850 – 2010 Global CO2 Emissions from Fossil-Fuels By Contribution To Total:
1950 – 2010 Global Per Capita CO2 Emissions from Fossil-Fuels:
1950 – 2010 Global Per Capita CO2 Emissions from Fossil-Fuels:
Cumulative Anthropogenic CO2 Emissions from Fossil-Fuels:
1950 – 2010 Global Per Capita CO2 Contributions By Source:
Note: All historical Land Use based estimates of CO2 contribution should be viewed with a high degree of skepticism. Further information on Land Use based CO2 estimates can be found Land Use Change section below.
Anthropogenic CO2 Emissions By Geography/Country
1965 – 2013 CO2 Emissions Developed World vs. Developing World:
1980 – 2013 CO2 Emissions and Emission Per Capita/Head Developed World vs. Developing World:
1965 – 2013 Cumulative CO2 Emissions Developed World vs. Developing World:
1965 – 2013 CO2 Emissions For Selected Countries:
1965 – 2013 CO2 Emissions Per Capita/Head For Selected Countries:
1965 – 2013 CO2 Emissions Per Capita/Head For Selected Countries:
1965 – 2013 Annual CO2 Emissions Growth vs. Total For Selected Countries:
Land Use Change Based CO2 Estimates:
There have been claims made that Land Use Changes measured as Annual Net Flux of Carbon to the Atmosphere were a significant source of Anthropogenic CO2, however the following graphs are based upon highly suspect Houghton data, i.e. from IPCC AR4: “Although the two recent satellite-based estimates point to a smaller source than that of Houghton (2003a), it is premature to say that Houghton’s numbers are overestimated.” Houghton’s method of reconstructing Land-Use Based Net Flux of Carbon appears arbitrary and susceptible to bias; i.e. “Rates of land-use change, including clearing for agriculture and harvest of wood, were reconstructed from statistical and historic documents for 9 world regions and used, along with the per ha [hectare] changes in vegetation and soil that result from land management, to calculate the annual flux of carbon between land and atmosphere.” Furthermore Houghton’s findings have varied significantly over time, i.e. in Houghton & Hackler, 2001 they found that, “The estimated global total net flux of carbon from changes in land use increased from 397 Tg of carbon in 1850 to 2187 Tg or 2.2 Pg of carbon in 1989 and then decreased slightly to 2103 Tg or 2.1 Pg of carbon in 1990”. However, by Houghton, R.A. 2008 he found, “The estimated global total net flux of carbon from changes in land use increased from 500.6 Tg C in 1850 to a maximum of 1712.5 Tg C in 1991”.
Annual Net Flux to the Atmosphere from Land Use Changes: 1850-2005 (Houghton)
Net Flux of Carbon to the Atmosphere from Land-Use Changes from 1850 to 1990;
Source Guide
British Petroleum (BP)
Home Page – http://www.bp.com/
Statistical Review of World Energy 2014 Page – http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html
Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) – U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) – Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) –
Home Page – http://cdiac.ornl.gov/
Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions Page – http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/meth_reg.html
Trace Gas Emissions: http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trace_gas_emissions.html
Atmospheric Measurements of Climate-Relevant Species – http://cdiac.ornl.gov/tracegases.html
ClimateGrog – Greg Goodman
Home Page – http://climategrog.wordpress.com/
European Environment Agency (EEA):
Home Page – http://www.eea.europa.eu/
Data and Maps Page – http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps
Graphs/Figures Page – http://wwws3.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/
Indicators Page – http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/#c5=&c7=all&c0=10&b_start=0
observed-trends-in-the-kyoto-gases-1/image_xlarge”> – Click the pic to view at source[/caption]
Ferdinand Engelbeen
Home Page – http://www.ferdinand-engelbeen.be/
Climate Page – http://www.ferdinand-engelbeen.be/klimaat/climate.html
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – Earth System Research Laboratory (ESRL)
Home Page – http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/
CO2 Page – http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
Physical Sciences Division (PSD) Products Page – http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/products/
Physical Sciences Division (PSD) Data Data Page – http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/
Physical Sciences Division (PSD) Data Maps Page – http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/
University of Washington – Department of Atmospheric Sciences – Dennis L. Hartmann
Department Of Atmospheric Sciences Home Page – http://www.atmos.washington.edu/
Dennis L. Hartman’s Page – http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~dennis/
Dear
How many percent of the annual co2 is caused by humans?
In many studies i have seen that the rise in temperature proceeds the rise in co2 concentrations, and that there is a timelag of approx 200-800 years
But in the last 100 years we see that co2 levels rise in approx the speed as worlds temperature ( except for the last 15-17 years)
Where is the timelag gone?
Do you have an explanation?
Many thanks
Broadly speaking, and we can address the specific changes due to man’s net release of CO2 into the atmosphere a bit later, the following true:
When CO2 levels were steady, global average temperatures rose.
.(But at the same rate they were rising between 1975 – 1996.)
When CO2 levels were steady, temperatures were steady.
When CO2 levels were steady, temperatures fell.
.(Again, at the same rate that they fell between 1945 and 1975.)
When CO2 levels rose, temperatures fell.
When CO2 levels rose, temperatures were steady.
When CO2 levels rose, temperatures rose at the same rate that they rose when CO2 levels were steady.
I have been maintaining a database of all CO2 estimates through geologic time from all studies which make the data available and are not just cherrypicking one date or three dates but provide at least ten estimates over some period (there is a huge amount of cherrypicking in climate science and especially with respect to CO2 levels).
There are a few methodologies which appear to be unreliable (producing unrealistically low estimates and unrealistically high ones that I have discarded – these are Paleosols/Pedogenic Carbonates, Boron and Tex-86 isotope calibrated estimates).
So here is ALL of the 2,700 reliable estimates of CO2 over the last 750 million years and for higher resolution, last 270, 40 and 8 million years.
http://s12.postimg.org/kuw5mqdst/CO2_LAST_750_Mys.png
http://s13.postimg.org/7jhm9tj9j/CO2_Last_270_Mya.png
http://s10.postimg.org/5fz8g5a3d/CO2_Last_40_Mys.png
http://s17.postimg.org/fwhaavhz3/CO2_Sea_Level_Last_8_Mya.png
The sources for these charts are all the estimates (excluding a few unreliable methods) from Berner GeoCarb III, Pagani 2005, Antarctic Ice Core Composite, Pagani 1999, Royer 2006 Composites, Pearson 2000, IPCC AR4 2007 – Royer 2008 Composites, Pearson 2009, Tripati 2009, Bao 2008, Hoenisch 2009, Beerling Royer 2011, Bartoli 2011, Seki 2010, Mcanena 2013
You might include JAXA’s CO2 and other gases emissions by region over time. https://data.gosat.nies.go.jp/GosatUserInterfaceGateway/guig/GuigPage/open.do
Or the CO2 page directly https://data.gosat.nies.go.jp/GosatBrowseImage/browseImage/fts_l2_swir_co2_gallery_en.html
Bernd Niessen – “How many percent of the annual co2 is caused by humans?”
The following may answer your question:
” Man’s CO2 output per year is less than three percent of the totals released by the combination of all natural forces and man — about 803 billion tons.”
“Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.”
Man-made CO2 accounts for 0.12% to Green House Gas effect, with Mother Nature accounts for 3.50%. Water Vapor (both man and mother nature) accounts for 95.00%.
Do you have sources for the 95% H2O, & 3.62% CO2 figures that pro-AGW people would accept?
“But in the last 100 years we see that co2 levels rise in approx the speed as worlds temperature ( except for the last 15-17 years).” “Where is the timelag gone?”
Quite possibly time lag is still there.
What we may be seeing now with some of the rise in CO2 levels is fallout of warming that occurred during MWP (about AD 950 to 1250).
2014 AD – 18-years = 1996 AD
“Warmer periods of the Earth’s history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.”
1996 AD – 800-years = 1196 AD.
With the warming we experienced 17-years ago, we may see an increase in CO2 levels in 783 years.
That I would like to see
This is a very helpful page.
I’d like to request one new plot please: Please show the total carbon at Mauna Lea, as a function of time just like NOAA but with the y-axis extending down to zero. This will help us visualize the increase in CO2 as a percentage of total CO2. Thanks.
Various statements have been made here and there that human activity, such as power generation, transportation, and industrial process, add up to about 3% of new CO2 emissions per year. Supposedly there are half a dozens or so larger sources (e.g. volcanoes, insect life, ocean expiration). If there are any reasonable sources for this kind of information, charts or links would be quite interesting. A CO2 fact page that focuses solely on human activity contributions gives as biased a view as those claims that only human activity is responsible for climate changes.
Thanks a lot for the answers
Is there a way to measure the part of the man made co2 content in the present atmosphere?
Great, thanks, but the forcing is the important one, not the concentration.
What exact forcing do you mean?
Water vapor cant be because there is no increase in the lower tropisphere humidity as far as i know
In the higher elevations the water vapor concentration is even going down for years
Gr
AndyH sez:
“Various statements have been made here and there that human activity, such as power generation, transportation, and industrial process, add up to about 3% of new CO2 emissions per year. Supposedly there are half a dozens or so larger sources (e.g. volcanoes, insect life, ocean expiration). If there are any reasonable sources for this kind of information, charts or links would be quite interesting. A CO2 fact page that focuses solely on human activity contributions gives as biased a view as those claims that only human activity is responsible for climate changes.”
AGREED!
Bill Illis says:
June 14, 2014 at 7:14 am
Interesting graphs. Two notes:
One for the last million years would help show the recent glaciation cycle.
Typo on all graphs – “unrealiable” should be “unreliable”. Or maybe “unrealistic”. Lewis Carroll would like it though.
Typo on the reference page, Teperature -> Temperature:
10,700 years – GISP2 – Teperature with CO2 from EPICA DomeC
[Done. Thank you. .mod]
In the chart labeled “160,000 to 1996 CO2 Concentration”, is it proper to display low resolution ice core info together with high resolution instrument readings in the same chart? As I understand it, a higher resolution source always will show much higher volatility of readings. Since we currently are in a CO2 upswing, this guarantees a hockey stick.
I suggest including charts of methane too.
How much of atmospheric CO2 & water vapor is from human resperation?
“respiration”
Watching Jaws iii earlier this week, I wondered what CO2 levels were during the Dinosaur era as those animals would have needed a lot of vegetation to keep their vast bodies nourished. The herbivores would need huge plants to eat and would in turn feed vast herbivores. I was pleased to find your charts, and discover that CO2 levels during their existence was between 1,570ppm and 520ppm roughly, but dropped below 500ppm at about the time of their disappearance. There must have been a reduction in scale of all life, all life being dependent on CO2. Life continued on a smaller scale and will no doubt do so again?
Could it be, that the earth’s atmospheric pressure was much higher than it is today? The consequences for all living things would be profound.
I don’t know about atmospheric pressure, but the very generous amount of CO2 would certainly have supplied abundant plant food, and therefore the size of the animals that grazed on them. It was also a warmer wetter world with no ice at the poles. I have never seen anyone comment on that connection, nor on the likelyhood that a dropping of the amount of CO2 would lead to smaller plants and animals. It seems obvious to me.
What of the argument by AGW advocates that the release of CO2 by human activity exceeds the increase CO2 in the past century, therefore the entire recent increase is due to man? I am suspicious of the logic in this claim.
Uggh, human emissions which are apparently responsible for the consistent increase.. have never matched CO2 growth.
The very equations relate surface emissions to CO2 growth surely.. yet CO2 growth does what it does regardless of our emissions.
We cant be a driver yet not affect CO2 growth with huge increases in emissions?
Of course the increase in CO2 being blamed on humans is an assumption with no empirical support, how could there be if no one actually can monitor CO2.
The budget balance of nature.. if on balance, means we drive increases, yet CO2 growth has never matched our growing emissions.
Strange, that this whole mess got so much traction based purely on an assumption based on a very loose short term correlation
Looks like CO2 concentrations in 2020 will be below all predictions by IPCC. Hat tip: US frackers
https://twitter.com/NelsonDaleSmith/status/790201772186886145
On further review not sure if my graph above is accurate. The the RCP’s are based on total greenhouse gases not just CO2. I have not yet seen any about how this is calculated.
Is there an accepted conversion factor for atmospheric ppm CO2 and metric tons C? We routinely see emmisions measured in metric tons, and changes in atmosheric CO2 expressed in ppm, but no explanation of how much carbon, by mass, is represented by a given atmospheric concentration. Without this conversion its impossible to tell if the roughly 8k to 10k metric tons per year from fossil fuels accounts for all of the annual increase in CO2, or only a fraction?
Good question, and it has a precise answer:
1 Gt Carbon= 1/2.12= 0.47ppm CO2
1 tonne Carbon=3.66 tonne CO2
1 GtCO2 emission =0.127 PPM of CO2 rise in atmosphere
https://onlineconversion.vbulletin.net/forum/main-forums/convert-and-calculate/11072-convert-gtco2-to-ppm-rise-in-atmosphere
That means that the 10 to 12 GT Carbon would have given 4.7 to 5.6 ppm CO2 rise in the atmosphere if all had stayed there, but since more than 50% goes to the ocean and plants, we only have about 2 ppm rise in the atmosphere.
What caused the periodic sharp increases in CO2 and temperature in prehistoric times? A new theory has been investigated at this website:
https://www.harrytodd.org
https://harrytodd.org/2015/10/28/chapter-6/
Fossil fuels like coal and oil supplied us using the essential
resource to generate our own electricity while using use of generators in power plants.
As energy prices increase and lots of homeowners be a little more alert to their carbon footprint, solar panel technology panels have received renewed interest among consumers.
However although many alternative energy options only really suitable for giant scale generation, wind turbines
have become successful when reduced to a size well
suited for home wind power and are creating a substantial contribution for a
household’s electricity requirements.
Hi Magnetic Energy, I am Solar Energy. Nice To Meet You “Again”, Seems Like We Are Heading In The Same Direction LOL. See You Later In The Comment Section Of Another Post. Byeeeee.
CO2 absorbs Infrared Radiation we all agree. What percent of this is emitted back to earth ? The IR Causes the CO2 molecules to vibrate and heat up, but doesn\’t that constitue work and the dissipation of heat ? how does it emit back to a warmer (earth ) surface when heat can only transfer from hot to cold ?
Do climate models use a single CO2 value to populate its global grid (for each vertical level), or do the models use regional CO2 values?