CO2 Graphs

Past week




Past month




Past year




Past two years




Keeling Curve (1958-present)




Past 500,000 years

(ice core data graphic courtesy of GlobalWarmingArt)


9 thoughts on “CO2 Graphs”

  1. Concerning the CO2 graphic labeled “Past 500,000 Years”:

    The time span in the insert is essentially a vertical line in the scale of the main graph and appears to begin near the top of the latest natural warming cycle. The result is a CO2 level that now exceeds the historic high point by an amount that is approximately equal to the entire CO2 deviations noted in the past 400,000 years.

    A couple of questions come to mind:
    Since the temperature hasn’t risen nearly as dramatically as the CO2 rise, does that not give credence to the concept the CO2 warming effect has approached saturation with diminishing temperature sensitivity to additional CO2?

    The high level of CO2 is going to stick around for a while. If the human race immediately died out, would that significantly change the temperature trend that has already been attributed to the current CO2 level?

  2. The increase in co2 over the last 100 years is only 1/100 to 2/100 of a percent. Really not enough mass to create a greenhouse effect. Methane is even much lower. Also, there are 36 volcanos erupting currently. The average for the previous century was only 36 per year. Sulfate aerosols cool the earth. Shown by previous VEI 6 eruptions. Plants and some animals thrive on co2. Plankton blooms will increase as the sink rate of co2 increases in the oceans. Trees and especially pine trees are great absorbers of co2. There have been increases in reforestation in some areas despite the ongoing deforestation. People need to understand how Gaia works to keep the planet optimal for life to thrive.
    There is also a noticed increase in solar energy output. And the albedo of the earth has also changed.

    1. Over the last hundred years atmospheric CO2 has risen from approx 295ppm to 407 ppm…almost a 39% increase. How did you arrive at .01% ??

        1. I had a discussion with a professor about why modern CO2 levels have apparently risen dramatically. My view is that you have different sampling techniques. Today we read levels in the atmosphere using a CO2 meter whereas before we analysed ice core samples (which take about 800 years to form) at Vostok Station.
          So aren’t we comparing apples with pears?
          Human emissions of CO2 are only about 4.5% of the total!
          The oceans emit about 12 times that, and the annual saw tooth in the graph occurs because as the oceans warm up in summer they emit more CO2 as per Henry’s Law, and visa versa in Winter.
          The real problem with the rise in human CO2 emissions in my view is that they are a symptom of overpopulation.

    2. CO2, not co2. The albedo has decreased (less polar ice), so more heat absorption. CO2, although only 400 ppm (0.04% of the atmospheric molecules), is THE heat absorbing molecule; as it increases the earth warms.

  3. The annual cycles of CO2 concentrations have a fairly typical sine wave. Does the Scripps data show any years where CO2 uptake significantly exceeded the winter highs? Essential this question focuses on the drawdown potential of northern hemisphere photosynthetic activity and whether you have seen any indications of such negative emissions in any of the historic record.

  4. James Hansen and his 18 coauthors in his paper in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics in 2016 stresses that earth’s energy imbalance expressed as W/m accurately describes climate change and predicts future events in which the imbalance adjusts on the global scale. Temperature is not a good prediction tool. The most immediate concerns are described as the melting of the Antarctic and Greenland glaciers and ice caps and the consequent input of melt water causing stratification of relative warm water at the feet of glaciers, causing accelerated melting and eventual multi-meter sea level rise much like in the Eemian age. This analysis by his large international team of scientists sees this process as significant enough to shut down the overturning circulations of the AMOC and SMOC deep water flows. The result: frequent super storms coupled with much higher sea levels throwing super tsunami sized waves, in the Atlantic at least, apparently a product of energy imbalance seeking a more neutral state in a violent clash of large air masses at widely differing states. The IPCC has failed to adequately model ocean water effects and no one has effectively modeled ice melt. Hansen’s group is pushing for work on exactly these kinds of model improvements to fully understand ocean water, ice sheet, and atmospheric dynamics.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

scripps oceanography uc san diego