Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.

Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Rose 0.82% in 2016; Methane Rose as Well

posted by Fnord666 on Thursday November 02 2017, @09:46AM   Printer-friendly
from the too-much-fizzy-cola dept.

The World Meteorological Organization issued a press release about its annual Greenhouse Gas Bulletin:

Globally averaged concentrations of CO2 reached 403.3 parts per million in 2016, up from 400.00 ppm in 2015 because of a combination of human activities and a strong El Niño event. [...]

[...] Since 1990, there has been a 40% increase in total radiative forcing – the warming effect on our climate - by all long-lived greenhouse gases, and a 2.5% increase from 2015 to 2016 alone, according to figures from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration quoted in the bulletin.

[...] Atmospheric methane reached a new high of about 1 853 parts per billion (ppb) in 2016 and is now 257% of the pre-industrial level.

BBC News reported:

"The 3 ppm CO2 growth rate in 2015 and 2016 is extreme - double the growth rate in the 1990-2000 decade," Prof Euan Nisbet from Royal Holloway University of London told BBC News.

[...] Another concern in the report is the continuing, mysterious rise of methane levels in the atmosphere, which were also larger than the average over the past ten years.

The Aliso Canyon gas leak happened in 2016.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Rose 0.82% in 2016; Methane Rose as Well | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 53 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday November 02 2017, @05:36PM (5 children)

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Thursday November 02 2017, @05:36PM (#591181) Journal

    By superlogarithmic do you mean the inverse of tetration? I don't see that in those equations.

    Nope, by "superlogarithmic" he's indicating he doesn't know WTF he's talking about.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 02 2017, @08:23PM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 02 2017, @08:23PM (#591316)

    If you think you do know shit, do explain how approximating logarithms by square roots work and where it ceases to.
    Or do quit jawing.

    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday November 02 2017, @09:51PM (3 children)

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Thursday November 02 2017, @09:51PM (#591375) Journal

      I don't need to because those expressions do not contain super logarithms.

      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday November 02 2017, @10:53PM (1 child)

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Thursday November 02 2017, @10:53PM (#591397) Journal

        I'll also point out that radiative forcing factors have nothing to do with the topic at hand which is c02 concentrations.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 03 2017, @03:49PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 03 2017, @03:49PM (#591707)

          Submitter quoted "a 40% increase in total radiative forcing" from the WMO press release.

      • (Score: 3, Funny) by driverless on Friday November 03 2017, @12:52AM

        by driverless (4770) on Friday November 03 2017, @12:52AM (#591444)

        Look, up there! Is it a sine? Is it a cosine? No, it's Superlogarithm!