Comments on: Comparing Annual Absolute Growth in Carbon Dioxide Concentrations with GDP http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:36:51 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: maurmike http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076&cpage=1#comment-13084 maurmike Sun, 22 Mar 2009 20:59:24 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076#comment-13084 Raven I was speaking of a CO2 ppm /year growth versus 1959 to 2008. It looks like a shotgun blast of bird shot. Raven

I was speaking of a CO2 ppm /year growth versus 1959 to 2008. It looks like a shotgun blast of bird shot.

]]> By: Raven http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076&cpage=1#comment-13083 Raven Sun, 22 Mar 2009 20:11:56 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076#comment-13083 maurmike, I realize that but I am confused about the X axis on the graph. Is it the year by year increase in GDP or is it the total increase from a fixed baseline? If it is the year by year increase in GDP then the graph does not make sense. maurmike,

I realize that but I am confused about the X axis on the graph.

Is it the year by year increase in GDP or is it the total increase from a fixed baseline?

If it is the year by year increase in GDP then the graph does not make sense.

]]> By: maurmike http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076&cpage=1#comment-13081 maurmike Sun, 22 Mar 2009 13:57:31 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076#comment-13081 Raven There isn't an even increase year to year. There is a lot of scatter. Raven

There isn’t an even increase year to year. There is a lot of scatter.

]]> By: Raven http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076&cpage=1#comment-13080 Raven Sun, 22 Mar 2009 07:51:39 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076#comment-13080 Roger, Why did you compare the change in GDP to the change in CO2? Even if the GDP did not change from year-to-year there should be an increase in CO2 which the increases getting larger as time goes on. Didn't you find that the later years all ended up on the top half of your plot? Roger,

Why did you compare the change in GDP to the change in CO2?

Even if the GDP did not change from year-to-year there should be an increase in CO2 which the increases getting larger as time goes on.

Didn’t you find that the later years all ended up on the top half of your plot?

]]> By: Don B http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076&cpage=1#comment-13079 Don B Sat, 21 Mar 2009 21:03:50 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076#comment-13079 The rate of ocean cooling/warming is a factor in atmospheric CO2 growth, as well as GDP growth rates. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/03/21/recent-ocean-heat-and-mlo-co2-trends/ The rate of ocean cooling/warming is a factor in atmospheric CO2 growth, as well as GDP growth rates.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/03/21/recent-ocean-heat-and-mlo-co2-trends/

]]> By: Hans Erren http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076&cpage=1#comment-13074 Hans Erren Fri, 20 Mar 2009 23:55:16 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076#comment-13074 Here is a graph of CO2 global annual emission growth and Dow Jones annual growth http://home.casema.nl/errenwijlens/co2/dji_emis.gif I am waiting eagerly for the 2008/2009 emission figures. Here is a graph of CO2 global annual emission growth and Dow Jones annual growth

http://home.casema.nl/errenwijlens/co2/dji_emis.gif

I am waiting eagerly for the 2008/2009 emission figures.

]]> By: maurmike http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076&cpage=1#comment-13072 maurmike Fri, 20 Mar 2009 21:11:40 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076#comment-13072 I plotted CO2 growth against year. There is a lot of scatter starting in the late '70's. Given that there is no way either GDP or enissions are going to correlate very well. I plotted CO2 growth against year. There is a lot of scatter starting in the late ’70’s. Given that there is no way either GDP or enissions are going to correlate very well.

]]> By: maurmike http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076&cpage=1#comment-13069 maurmike Fri, 20 Mar 2009 18:51:32 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076#comment-13069 Looking at the individual NOAA numbers there is a very significant natural effect. If you could figure what causes the absorbtion to be weaker or stronger would be useful. Looking at the individual NOAA numbers there is a very significant natural effect. If you could figure what causes the absorbtion to be weaker or stronger would be useful.

]]> By: Maurice Garoutte http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076&cpage=1#comment-13068 Maurice Garoutte Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:49:11 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=5076#comment-13068 The CO2 growth axis mixes natural sources, natural sinks, and manmade emissions. There would be less scatter in the diagram if only CO2 emissions from energy use were plotted. A second line chart could plot total CO2 in the atmosphere against CO2 from energy use. The CO2 growth axis mixes natural sources, natural sinks, and manmade emissions. There would be less scatter in the diagram if only CO2 emissions from energy use were plotted.

A second line chart could plot total CO2 in the atmosphere against CO2 from energy use.

]]>