New data show that the balance between the airborne and the absorbed fraction of carbon dioxide has stayed approximately constant since 1850, despite emissions of carbon dioxide having risen from about 2 billion tons a year in 1850 to 35 billion tons a year now....

The strength of the new study, published online in Geophysical Research Letters, is that it rests solely on measurements and statistical data, including historical records extracted from Antarctic ice, and does not rely on computations with complex climate models.

This suggests that terrestrial ecosystems and the oceans have a much greater capacity to absorb CO2 than had been previously expected.
...
Dr Wolfgang Knorr at the University of Bristol found that in fact the trend in the airborne fraction since 1850 has only been 0.7 ± 1.4% per decade, which is essentially zero.

Originally posted by Maxmars

I wonder who is going to say this information 'doesn't apply' to UNIVACS' calcualtions - therefore it doesn't count?

Originally posted by melatonin

Of course. One study that says absorption by sinks in the recent past might not have altered, even though few have suggested it has (two/three), is just going to magic away our emissions, their accumulation, their future effects, and any potential future changes in the carbon cycle, lol.

Another result of the study is that emissions from deforestation might have been overestimated by between 18 and 75 per cent. This would agree with results published in early November in Nature Geoscience by a team led by Guido van der Werf from VU University Amsterdam. They re-visited deforestation data and concluded that emissions have been overestimated by at least a factor of two.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by Maxmars

Originally posted by Maxmars

I wonder who is going to say this information 'doesn't apply' to UNIVACS' calcualtions - therefore it doesn't count?

Aw come on Max... you already knew the answer to this.

....


I have also yet to hear of a single study which addresses the action of photosynthesis in a rising atmospheric concentration of CO2 (an experiment which would be pretty easy to accomplish). I have seen precious little investigation into the heat island effect of cities and extensive highway systems, which act like huge heat reservoirs. In short, this is not about saving the planet; it is about demonizing CO2.

TheRedneck

Seriously, though, this study is interesting as it indicates that previous studies may have been off the mark with their calculations in more areas than just carbon sink action. Farther down it states:

Another result of the study is that emissions from deforestation might have been overestimated by between 18 and 75 per cent. This would agree with results published in early November in Nature Geoscience by a team led by Guido van der Werf from VU University Amsterdam. They re-visited deforestation data and concluded that emissions have been overestimated by at least a factor of two.

Source: www.sciencedaily.com...

This is a further indication that the controversy needs further study before we relegate society back to stone-age existence. Sure, mel was right in that the data sets of this study and prior studies overlap, but this study appears to extend the range much lower than what was previously believed. I have also yet to hear of a single study which addresses the action of photosynthesis in a rising atmospheric concentration of CO2 (an experiment which would be pretty easy to accomplish). I have seen precious little investigation into the heat island effect of cities and extensive highway systems, which act like huge heat reservoirs. In short, this is not about saving the planet; it is about demonizing CO2.

TheRedneck

"I can’t believe that!” said Alice.
“Can’t you?” the Queen said in a pitying tone. “Try again: draw a long breath, and shut your eyes.”
Alice laughed. “There’s no use trying,” she said: “one can’t believe impossible things.”
“I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”