GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[TailingsPond + 547]

10 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Some of us have actually been employed in the statistical trade...does that exclude you?

Show use your massive statistical skills!  I would love to see them!

Please use correlation coefficients, P-values, standard distributions, Q data rejection and all your other skills.

I'm waiting.

Edited June 16 by TailingsPond

[TailingsPond + 547]

At least describe the data set presented in simple terms.   A good statistician can just glace over a data set and certain trends jump out at them.

[TailingsPond + 547]

Here is a start.

What are the limitation of this model?

Why would an expert know that this model is incorrect at first glance despite the excellent model fit of 0.98?  Hmm?

Strut your stuff big boy!

 

Edited June 16 by TailingsPond

[TailingsPond + 547]

Oh strut your stuff big boy!  Here are some hints!

[notsonice + 1,155]

6 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Here is your problem, and it is worse than 7%,

"Tumbling private demand for electric vehicles (EVs) has dominated media headlines throughout this year, fuelling car owners’ concerns over the high cost of making the transition.

Car industry data, provided by the sector’s trade body the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), showed sales to private buyers had fallen 7.7 per cent in April."

Again, we are not talking about tumbling sales "rates", that is where you became confused. This is a catastrophic fall of 7.7% in units sold, that is not an increase at all.

Here is what counts, 

"...the far-right parties are expected to attack the EU’s ban on the sale of new gasoline and diesel cars from 2035. As part of the efforts to slash emissions from the transportation sector, the EU approved in 2023 legislation saying that from 2035, all new cars that come on the market cannot emit any carbon dioxide (CO2), effectively banning the sale of new cars with internal combustion engines. This measure is set for review in 2026."

It is time to reopen for review and elimination the climate panic policies which threaten the well-being of Americans. 

keep dreaming that EV sales are on a path of decline........or the Green Agenda will be undone

Reality EVs are getting better and better and at the same time cheaper and cheaper

solar panels get cheaper and cheaper and battery storage coupled with solar panels is replacing Coal and Nat gas on a grand scale.....

if you do no like the Green Agenda in 2024 you will hate the Green Agenda in 2025...Your love of dirty coal fired power plants and smog filled cities is doomed.

Enjoy as the Green Agenda is picking up speed...........EVERYWHERE

 

https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2024/03/06/battery-prices-collapsing-grid-tied-energy-storage-expanding/

Since last summer, lithium battery cell pricing has plummeted by approximately 50%, according to Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Limited (CATL), the world’s largest battery manufacturer. In early summer 2023, publicly available prices ranged from 0.8 to 0.9 RMB/Wh ($0.11 to $0.13 USD/Wh), or about $110 to 130/kWh.

Pricing initially fell by about a third by the end of summer 2023. Now, as reported by CnEVPost, large EV battery buyers are acquiring cells at 0.4 RMB/Wh, representing a price decline of 50%to 56%. Leapmotor’s CEO, Cao Li, expects further reductions, with prices potentially dropping to 0.32 RMB/Wh this summer, marking a decrease of 60% to 64% in a single year.

EnergyTrend observed that energy storage battery cells are priced similarly to electric vehicle battery cells.

Additionally, CnEVPost reports that the battery cells being sold come equipped with advanced technologies, including faster charge rates, higher cycle life, improved temperature management characteristics, and higher energy density packaging.

[turbguy + 1,485]

9 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

There should be some noticeable change in CO2 atmospheric levels in response to changes in anthropogenic emissions levels, that is just a clear result of assuming that anthropogenic emissions are important in atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

If atmospheric CO2 levels do not respond to changes in anthropogenic emissions levels, then obviously something else is controlling the narrative.

Natural CO2 production is acknowledged to be the prime driver in CO2 levels, not anthropogenic.

I don't disagree. although there are a host of processes at work, both "natural" and man-made, that could add and subtract to the concentration of CO₂ in the measurements.

My intent is to recognize that there has been no really significant change in the USA's emissions as shown in your reference.  Add to that the potentially increasing emissions from "elsewhere" must be included in thoughts concerning global measurements.

[Ecocharger + 1,398]

EVs have driven over the proverbial cliff...realities are coming home to roost and it is becoming crystal clear the there never was a realistic possibility to replace fossil fuel transport with EVs, it was just a vastly overblown pipe-dream.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/From-Fantasy-to-Fact-The-EV-Slowdown-Gets-Real.html

"Despite significant efforts and investments, the growth in demand for electric vehicles is declining rapidly.

The European Commission's new tariffs on China-made EVs, and on European carmakers outsourcing to China, will increase prices, potentially hindering EV adoption in Europe.

The removal of government subsidies for EVs in countries like New Zealand and Germany has led to a significant drop in sales."

"Earlier this week, a battery material maker from Belgium became the latest to sound the alarm on EVs. “Against the backdrop of a sharp slowdown in the growth of demand for EVs impacting the entire supply chain, customers’ demand projections for Umicore’s battery materials have steeply declined in recent weeks,” the company said in an update. “Consequently 2024 volumes for its battery materials could be equal or slightly lower than last year.”

Were it anyone else saying this, the warning might well have been dismissed as speculation or climate denialism. But Umicore is one of the biggest makers of battery materials used in electric cars. It should know what it is talking about "

"...for months now, carmakers have signaled they were starting to have misgivings about their full-EV plans, with Mercedes saying in February that it no longer plans to be selling EVs only from 2030 and Renault’s EV sales, while rising, were rising a lot more slowly than that of rivals including Mercedes.

There are warning signs all over the world, not only in Europe. What these signs are saying is that EVs cannot make it on their own in a free market. In New Zealand, EV sales had been going strong for years thanks to generous government subsidies—until 2023. At the end of last year, the New Zealand government ended the subsidies, and sales immediately plummeted. The same happened in Germany, where the government was forced by financial circumstances to phase out EV subsidies."

Edited June 17 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,398]

47 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

Oh strut your stuff big boy!  Here are some hints!

I could throw you some quiz games too, but what I want to see from you is a basic understanding of how the graphs on CO2 anthropogenic emissions decline and the continued growth of atmospheric CO2 presents a problem for your Green Dreams, you seem to be having trouble understanding how the two are incompatible.

Anyone with a basic understanding of stats or calculus should be able to see that from the material I presented to you above. Your inability to see it makes me wonder about your math and stats background. You worked professionally as a stats man? I certainly did.

Throwing out a quiz does not answer the bell.

Edited June 17 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,398]

Just now, notsonice said:

keep dreaming that EV sales are on a path of decline........or the Green Agenda will be undone

Reality EVs are getting better and better and at the same time cheaper and cheaper

solar panels get cheaper and cheaper and battery storage coupled with solar panels is replacing Coal and Nat gas on a grand scale.....

if you do no like the Green Agenda in 2024 you will hate the Green Agenda in 2025...Your love of dirty coal fired power plants and smog filled cities is doomed.

Enjoy as the Green Agenda is picking up speed...........EVERYWHERE

 

https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2024/03/06/battery-prices-collapsing-grid-tied-energy-storage-expanding/

Since last summer, lithium battery cell pricing has plummeted by approximately 50%, according to Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Limited (CATL), the world’s largest battery manufacturer. In early summer 2023, publicly available prices ranged from 0.8 to 0.9 RMB/Wh ($0.11 to $0.13 USD/Wh), or about $110 to 130/kWh.

Pricing initially fell by about a third by the end of summer 2023. Now, as reported by CnEVPost, large EV battery buyers are acquiring cells at 0.4 RMB/Wh, representing a price decline of 50%to 56%. Leapmotor’s CEO, Cao Li, expects further reductions, with prices potentially dropping to 0.32 RMB/Wh this summer, marking a decrease of 60% to 64% in a single year.

EnergyTrend observed that energy storage battery cells are priced similarly to electric vehicle battery cells.

Additionally, CnEVPost reports that the battery cells being sold come equipped with advanced technologies, including faster charge rates, higher cycle life, improved temperature management characteristics, and higher energy density packaging.

EVs are continuing to lose market share to fossil fuel vehicles.

"the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) revealed the steep dip in private retail demand, The trade body said it now expected battery electric models' market share to reduce to 21 per cent in 2024, down from a previous 23.3 per cent forecast."

[Ecocharger + 1,398]

14 hours ago, turbguy said:

I don't disagree. although there are a host of processes at work, both "natural" and man-made, that could add and subtract to the concentration of CO₂ in the measurements.

My intent is to recognize that there has been no really significant change in the USA's emissions as shown in your reference.  Add to that the potentially increasing emissions from "elsewhere" must be included in thoughts concerning global measurements.

Well, the two big emitters of anthropogenic CO2 are China and America, both are so huge that a significant reduction in anthropogenic emissions, largely in transportation and electrical, over a nearly twenty year period of over 1,000 PPM per year (as we have seen in America) should have a clearly noticeable impact on atmospheric CO2. That is assuming that anthropogenic CO2 is a significant contributor to atmospheric CO2. 

Instead, there has not been any noticeable impact on the trend of atmospheric CO2.

We would expect some noticeable decline in atmospheric CO2 at least in the North American continent.

Top 10 highest carbon emitting countries 

The top 10 countries in terms of MtCO 2 emissions (in million tons of CO2) for 2021 are listed below:

Rank	Country	MtCO2  (million tons of CO2)	Percentage of World CO2 Emission
1	China	12,667	32.88%
2	United States of America	5,057	12.6%
3	India	2,830	6.99%
4	Russia	2,032	4.96%
5	Japan	1,083	2.81%
6	Indonesia	729	1.8%
8	Iran	691	1.78%
7	Germany	673	1.75%
9	Saudi Arabia	663	1.66%
10	South Korea	636	1.53%

Based on the latest annual figures from 2022. Sourced via Global Carbon Project and World Population Review.

Judging from the results of these graphs, we see absolutely zero response in atmospheric CO2 levels from this vast extended decline in American anthropogenic CO2 emissions,

In other words, current policy to reduce atmospheric CO2 is worthless, not only minor but insignificant.

That was also the conclusion of other measurement studies of GHG.

 

Edited June 17 by Ecocharger

[notsonice + 1,155]

6 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Well, the two big emitters of anthropogenic CO2 are China and America, both are so huge that a significant reduction in anthropogenic emissions, largely in transportation and electrical, over a nearly twenty year period of over 1,000 PPM per year (as we have seen in America) should have a clearly noticeable impact on atmospheric CO2. That is assuming that anthropogenic CO2 is a significant contributor to atmospheric CO2. 

Instead, there has not been any noticeable impact on the trend of atmospheric CO2.

Top 10 highest carbon emitting countries 

The top 10 countries in terms of MtCO 2 emissions (in million tons of CO2) for 2021 are listed below:

Rank	Country	MtCO2  (million tons of CO2)	Percentage of World CO2 Emission
1	China	12,667	32.88%
2	United States of America	5,057	12.6%
3	India	2,830	6.99%
4	Russia	2,032	4.96%
5	Japan	1,083	2.81%
6	Indonesia	729	1.8%
8	Iran	691	1.78%
7	Germany	673	1.75%
9	Saudi Arabia	663	1.66%
10	South Korea	636	1.53%

Based on the latest annual figures from 2022. Sourced via Global Carbon Project and World Population Review.

Judging from the results of these graphs, we see absolutely zero response in atmospheric CO2 levels from this vast extended decline in American anthropogenic CO2 emissions,

In other words, current policy to reduce atmospheric CO2 is worthless, not only minor but insignificant.

That was also the conclusion of other measurement studies of GHG.

 

well your first chart lines up with the increase in global emissions so all of your BS babble is just that BS

 

notice both charts are moving up with the identical exponential trajectories

 

Edited June 17 by notsonice

[Ecocharger + 1,398]

39 minutes ago, notsonice said:

well your first chart lines up with the increase in global emmions so all of your BS babble is just that BS

 

notice both charts are moving up with the identical exponential trajectory

 

Thanks! That is exactly the point I was making and you have just affirmed it. Great work, you deserve a promotion out of my invisible list if you keep this up.

The point is that American anthropogenic CO2 emissions have substantially declined since 2007 yet atmospheric CO2 has not been affected by that decline...therefore, it appears that anthropogenic CO2 has no impact on atmospheric CO2.

Bravo!

Unfortunately, your second chart apparently does not show anthropogenic emissions of CO2, according to the title. It should sort out anthropogenic from natural.

Edited June 17 by Ecocharger

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,165]

21 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Thanks! That is exactly the point I was making and you have just affirmed it. Great work, you deserve a promotion out of my invisible list if you keep this up.

The point is that American anthropogenic CO2 emissions have substantially declined since 2007 yet atmospheric CO2 has not been affected by that decline...therefore, it appears that anthropogenic CO2 has no impact on atmospheric CO2.

Bravo!

Unfortunately, your second chart apparently does not show anthropogenic emissions of CO2, according to the title. It should sort out anthropogenic from natural.

Have you had a aneurysm?  Check into a hospital pronto... Atmosphere is Global bud.🙃

[turbguy + 1,485]

9 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Thanks! That is exactly the point I was making and you have just affirmed it. Great work, you deserve a promotion out of my invisible list if you keep this up.

The point is that American anthropogenic CO2 emissions have substantially declined since 2007 yet atmospheric CO2 has not been affected by that decline...therefore, it appears that anthropogenic CO2 has no impact on atmospheric CO2.

Bravo!

Unfortunately, your second chart apparently does not show anthropogenic emissions of CO2, according to the title. It should sort out anthropogenic from natural.

The most well-known location for measuring atmospheric CO2 content in the USA isn't actually within the continental US, but it's still a critical data point.

The longest-running and most influential measurements for atmospheric CO2 in the context of the USA come from the Mauna Loa Observatory on Hawaii [NASA Climate Change, Carbon Dioxide].

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/?intent=121

While Hawaii isn't technically part of the mainland US, these measurements are widely considered representative of the global background CO2 levels, due to the remoteness of the location.

I personally do not see a substantial reduction of CO₂ in your reference.

Edited June 17 by turbguy

[Ecocharger + 1,398]

Here are graphs for anthropogenic CO2 showing some interesting results.

Both America and Europe have greatly reduced anthropogenic CO2 since 2000.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-country

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co-emissions-by-region

 

[Ecocharger + 1,398]

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

The most well-known location for measuring atmospheric CO2 content in the USA isn't actually within the continental US, but it's still a critical data point.

The longest-running and most influential measurements for atmospheric CO2 in the context of the USA come from the Mauna Loa Observatory on Hawaii [NASA Climate Change, Carbon Dioxide].

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/?intent=121

While Hawaii isn't technically part of the mainland US, these measurements are widely considered representative of the global background CO2 levels, due to the remoteness of the location.

I personally do not see a substantial reduction of CO₂ in your reference.

Again, this is total atmospheric CO2, not specifically anthropogenic. We have seen major reductions in anthropogenic CO2 in Europe and America.

It seems that natural CO2 production overwhelms the reductions in anthropogenic CO2.

[turbguy + 1,485]

9 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Again, this is total atmospheric CO2, not specifically anthropogenic. We have seen major reductions in anthropogenic CO2 in Europe and America.

It seems that natural CO2 production overwhelms the reductions in anthropogenic CO2.

Major reductions?

Where?

Not even in the USA, per YOUR reference.

Remember, the stone age came to an end not for a lack of stone, and the oil age will end, but not for a lack of oil.

[turbguy + 1,485]

41 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Here are graphs for anthropogenic CO2 showing some interesting results.

Both America and Europe have greatly reduced anthropogenic CO2 since 2000.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-country

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co-emissions-by-region

 

From you own references, showing GLOBAL data.

WHAT "reduction"????

 

 

Edited June 17 by turbguy

[Ecocharger + 1,398]

3 hours ago, turbguy said:

From you own references, showing GLOBAL data.

WHAT "reduction"????

 

 

What region? Where is America and Europe where the big decline is? You just forgot to include that?

Yes there is a plateauing movement in both your graphs for the recent period. You miss that?

And we need to see what proportion of atmospheric CO2 is derived from anthropogenic CO2 emissions...I guess the government boys do not want to discuss that.

 

Edited June 17 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,398]

Oil demand looks strong, pushing up prices.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Oil-Prices-Jump-2-on-Improving-Demand-Outlook.html

""The outlook for strong fuel demand into the coming quarter and Saudi reassurance about the October hike being subject to prevailing conditions and added focus on quota breakers to bring production down and into line all seems to be supporting," Reuters cited Ole Hansen of Saxo Bank as saying on Monday.

Reuters also reported that traders on Monday were rebuying oil they sold out last week after OPEC+ assurances.

Also driving oil prices upwards on Monday was economic data coming out of China and suggesting more optimism for oil demand growth there. 

While Chinese industrial output came in below expectations, investment in manufacturing so far this year was up 9.6%. "

[Ecocharger + 1,398]

Here are some estimates of changes in the anthropogenic CO2 profile for major nations, showing that America and Europe are experiencing reductions of large magnitudes in anthropogenic CO2 emissions despite increasing demand and consumption of  fossil fuels.

 

https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/15/5301/2023/

 

" Regionally, fossil emissions in 2023 are expected to decrease by 7.4% in the European Union (0.7 Gt C, 2.6 Gt CO₂) and by 3.0% in the United States (1.3 Gt C, 4.9 Gt CO₂), but they are expected to increase by 4.0 % in China (3.2 Gt C, 11.9 Gt CO₂), 8.2 % in India (0.8 Gt C, 3.1 Gt CO₂), and −0.4 % for the rest of the world (3.8 Gt C, 14.0 Gt CO₂)."

 

The major importance of forestry in CO2 emissions is highlighted in this study.

Deforestation is the major cause of anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

Failing to address deforestation would overwhelm and destroy any expected CO2 reductions from reducing use of fossil fuels.

 

"Global CO₂ emissions from land use, land-use change, and forestry (LULUCF) averaged 1.3±0.7 Gt C yr⁻¹ (4.7±2.6 Gt CO₂ yr⁻¹) for the 2013–2022 period with a preliminary projection for 2023 of 1.1±0.7 Gt C yr⁻¹ (4.0±2.6 Gt CO₂ yr⁻¹). A small decrease over the past 2 decades is not robust given the large model uncertainty. Emissions from deforestation, the main driver of global gross sources, remain high at around 1.9 Gt C yr⁻¹ over the 2013–2022 period, highlighting the strong potential of halting deforestation for emissions reductions. Sequestration of 1.3 Gt C yr⁻¹ through re-/afforestation and forestry offsets two-thirds of the deforestation emissions. Emissions from other land-use transitions and from peat drainage and peat fire add further smaller contributions. The highest emitters during 2013–2022 in descending order were Brazil, Indonesia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, with these three countries contributing more than half of global land-use CO₂ emissions."

 

Natural sources of CO2 and natural CO2 sinks are much more important in terms of effects on CO2 levels.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-the-world-passed-a-carbon-threshold-400ppm-and-why-it-matters

"Natural sources of CO2, from forest fires to soil and plant respiration and decomposition, are much bigger — about 30 times larger than what mankind produces each year. "

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Monday at 09:41 PM by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,398]

16 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Have you had a aneurysm?  Check into a hospital pronto... Atmosphere is Global bud.🙃

Check this out, bud.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/82142/global-patterns-of-carbon-dioxide

"The AIRS instrument measures 2,378 different infrared channels, or segments, of infrared light. Carbon dioxide absorbs and emits very specific wavelengths of infrared light, giving it a unique fingerprint. By measuring the emitted thermal infrared radiation, AIRS can detect this fingerprint, giving scientists a way to estimate carbon dioxide concentrations globally.

AIRS has shown that carbon dioxide is not evenly distributed over the globe; it is patchy with high concentrations in some places and lower concentrations in others. The gas’s transport and distribution through the atmosphere is  controlled by the jet stream, by large weather systems, and other large-scale atmospheric circulations."

https://earthsky.org/earth/6-things-to-know-carbon-dioxide-co2-greenhouse-gas/

"3. CO2 is not evenly distributed.

Satellite observations show carbon dioxide in the air can be somewhat patchy, with high concentrations in some places and lower concentrations in others. For instance, the map below shows carbon dioxide levels for May 2013 in the mid-troposphere, the part of the atmosphere where most weather occurs. At the time there was more carbon dioxide in the northern hemisphere because crops, grasses, and trees hadn’t greened up yet and absorbed some of the gas. The transport and distribution of CO2 throughout the atmosphere is controlled by the jet stream, large weather systems, and other large-scale atmospheric circulations. This patchiness has raised interesting questions about how carbon dioxide is transported from one part of the atmosphere to another – both horizontally and vertically."

Edited Monday at 09:27 PM by Ecocharger

[notsonice + 1,155]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

Oil demand looks strong, pushing up prices.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Oil-Prices-Jump-2-on-Improving-Demand-Outlook.html

""The outlook for strong fuel demand into the coming quarter and Saudi reassurance about the October hike being subject to prevailing conditions and added focus on quota breakers to bring production down and into line all seems to be supporting," Reuters cited Ole Hansen of Saxo Bank as saying on Monday.

Reuters also reported that traders on Monday were rebuying oil they sold out last week after OPEC+ assurances.

Also driving oil prices upwards on Monday was economic data coming out of China and suggesting more optimism for oil demand growth there. 

While Chinese industrial output came in below expectations, investment in manufacturing so far this year was up 9.6%. "

from the article you are quoting  Rystad estimated supply growth at around 80,000 barrels per day for 2024, down from earlier expectations of 900,000 bpd, which had been made in early June Reuters reported on Monday. 

so how do you come up with Oil demand looks strong??????????????  looks flat at best especially in light of the SPR being refilled and China stockpiling over 1 million barrels a day

stop smoking the wacky weed 

 oil imports into China this year for the Jan-May period are less than the same period in 2023....take a read and then tell us all about your so called Oil demand looks strong

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/China-Accelerates-Crude-Stockpiling-Amid-Weak-Refining-Output.html 

The acceleration of China’s stockpiling wouldn’t have been a concern for those watching demand trends in the world’s top crude importer if it weren’t for a slowdown in imports this year and a slump in refining output.

China’s Crude oil imports are estimated to have averaged about 11.0 million bpd for January to May, down by 1.2% year-over-year, according to Reuters’ Russell.

In May alone, refiners in China processed 14.25 million bpd of crude, down by 1.8% year-over-year, according to data in tons from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) converted into barrels by Reuters.

and the kicker

CleanTechnica

China’s Oil & Gas Giant Sinopec Says Peak Oil Demand Already Happened In China

Given that 45% of every barrel of oil turns into gasoline, that means China has reached peak petroleum demand. China has an oil demand of...

.

Oct 11, 2023

Solar panel production, wind turbines and EVs are booming   resulting in investment in manufacturing so far this year was up 9.6%. "

Enjoy the Green Agenda as the worlds economies are expanding while oil demand is decreasing...get used to it 

Peak Oil already happened

Edited Monday at 09:30 PM by notsonice

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,165]

26 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Check this out, bud.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/82142/global-patterns-of-carbon-dioxide

"The AIRS instrument measures 2,378 different infrared channels, or segments, of infrared light. Carbon dioxide absorbs and emits very specific wavelengths of infrared light, giving it a unique fingerprint. By measuring the emitted thermal infrared radiation, AIRS can detect this fingerprint, giving scientists a way to estimate carbon dioxide concentrations globally.

AIRS has shown that carbon dioxide is not evenly distributed over the globe; it is patchy with high concentrations in some places and lower concentrations in others. The gas’s transport and distribution through the atmosphere is  controlled by the jet stream, by large weather systems, and other large-scale atmospheric circulations."

Dear God you are dense.  This error band is VERY NARROW compared to the total.  Can you NOT READ THE DAMNED GRAPH YOU LINKED TO????  10ppm differnce!!!!  Do you need READING glasses?  Or extrapolate?  Are you becoming as STUPID as pondscum and nobrain?  Sigh.  Great, we can see smoke stacks from space, and where are said smoke stacks? ... So?  Guess what, this is why we measure at Hawaii, as the air mixes for thousands of kilometers across the ocean who  absorbs immense amounts of CO2.  Yikes dude.  Get a clue ... which hemisphere has larger population and less Ocean to absorb said CO2 and takes a bit longer to migrate down to the Southern Hemisphere where there is less population and FAR more ocean absorption?  What also eats CO2? faster?  High wind speeds and CO2 absorption is to the 4th power of wind speed.  Thunderstorms over the ocean along the tropics absorb more CO2 than anywhere else.  Where are lowest CO2 recordings far north/south and .... tropics.  + tropical forests which also eat more.  Why far north/south? Cold water absorbs more CO2 and generally have higher wind speeds as well, due to higher temp differentials to land absorbing even more CO2. 

Yikes dude, learn a few things before typing so much. 

Edited Monday at 09:30 PM by footeab@yahoo.com

[Ecocharger + 1,398]

20 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Dear God you are dense.  This error band is VERY NARROW compared to the total.  Can you NOT READ THE DAMNED GRAPH YOU LINKED TO????  Or extrapolate?  Are you becoming as STUPID as pondscum and nobrain?  Sigh.  Great, we can see smoke stacks from space, and where are said smoke stacks? ... So?  Guess what, this is why we measure at Hawaii, as the air mixes for thousands of kilometers across the ocean who  absorbs immense amounts of CO2.  Yikes dude.  Get a clue ... which hemisphere has larger population and less Ocean to absorb said CO2 and takes a bit longer to migrate down to the Southern Hemisphere where there is less population and FAR more ocean absorption?  What also eats CO2? faster?  High wind speeds and CO2 absorption is to the 4th power of wind speed.  Thunderstorms over the ocean along the tropics absorb more CO2 than anywhere else.  Where are lowest CO2 recordings.... tropics.  + tropical forests which also eat more.  Cold water absorbs more and generally have higher wind speeds as well, absorbing even more CO2. 

Yikes dude, learn a few things before typing so much. 

1) First, you have failed to show what proportion of atmospheric CO2 is anthropogenic, so that is your first assignment, which you are trying to dodge.

2) Second, the patchiness of  CO2 concentrations persists throughout the weather systems and cycles.

https://earthsky.org/earth/6-things-to-know-carbon-dioxide-co2-greenhouse-gas/

"3. CO2 is not evenly distributed.

Satellite observations show carbon dioxide in the air can be somewhat patchy, with high concentrations in some places and lower concentrations in others. For instance, the map below shows carbon dioxide levels for May 2013 in the mid-troposphere, the part of the atmosphere where most weather occurs. At the time there was more carbon dioxide in the northern hemisphere because crops, grasses, and trees hadn’t greened up yet and absorbed some of the gas. The transport and distribution of CO2 throughout the atmosphere is controlled by the jet stream, large weather systems, and other large-scale atmospheric circulations. This patchiness has raised interesting questions about how carbon dioxide is transported from one part of the atmosphere to another – both horizontally and vertically."

3) Thirdly, any anthropogenic source of CO2 is miniscule compared to the natural sources and sinks, and therefore is of insignificance in calculating contributions to greenhouse gas strengths.

"Natural sources of CO2, from forest fires to soil and plant respiration and decomposition, are much bigger — about 30 times larger than what mankind produces each year. "

Time for you and others to get a grip on perspectives and reality.

Edited Monday at 09:47 PM by Ecocharger