Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Earth

Carbon Dioxide Levels In the Atmosphere Are Surging 'Faster Than Ever,' Report Finds 226

Carbon dioxide levels in Earth's atmosphere are accumulating "faster than ever" and have reached unprecedented levels, with a peak of 426.9 ppm recorded at NOAA's Mauna Loa Observatory in May 2024, said scientists from NOAA, the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the University of California San Diego. CBS News reports: "Over the past year, we've experienced the hottest year on record, the hottest ocean temperatures on record, and a seemingly endless string of heat waves, droughts, floods, wildfires and storms," NOAA Administrator Rick Spinrad said in a press release. "Now we are finding that atmospheric CO2 levels are increasing faster than ever." The researchers measured carbon dioxide, or CO2, levels at the Mauna Loa Atmospheric Baseline Observatory. They found that atmospheric levels of the gas hit a seasonal peak of just under 427 parts per million in May -- an increase of 2.9 ppm since May 2023 and the fifth-largest annual growth in 50 years of data recording.

It also made official that the past two years saw the largest jump in the May peak -- when CO2 levels are at their highest in the Northern Hemisphere. John Miller, a NOAA carbon cycle scientist, said that the jump likely stems from the continuous rampant burning of fossil fuels as well as El Nino conditions making the planet's ability to absorb CO2 more difficult. The surge of carbon dioxide levels at the measuring station surpassed even the global average set last year, which was a record high of 419.3 ppm -- 50% higher than it was before the Industrial Revolution. However, NOAA noted that their observations were taken at the observatory specifically, and do not "capture the changes of CO2 across the globe," although global measurements have proven consistent without those at Mauna Loa.
"Not only is CO2 now at the highest level in millions of years, it is also rising faster than ever," Ralph Keeling, director of Scripps' CO2 program, said in the release. "Each year achieves a higher maximum due to fossil-fuel burning, which releases pollution in the form of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Fossil fuel pollution just keeps building up, much like trash in a landfill."

"We are living in unprecedented times. ... This string of hottest months will be remembered as comparatively cold," Carlo Buontempo, director of Copernicus, added.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Carbon Dioxide Levels In the Atmosphere Are Surging 'Faster Than Ever,' Report Finds

Comments Filter:
  • by Lavandera ( 7308312 ) on Saturday June 08, 2024 @03:08AM (#64532581)

    The question who should bear these costs:

    1. those who caused it by emitting CO2 as EU tries to do

    2. everyone, especially those unlucky living on the coast, or hot areas or in huragan/cyclone paths as Big Oil/trolls/Russia/Arabs want...

    • by bill_mcgonigle ( 4333 ) * on Saturday June 08, 2024 @06:18AM (#64532805) Homepage Journal

      Why do we have complete submerged cities far off the current coasts of Old World ports?

      The Earth's polar regions are ice free at times. Are we going to try to build a 400' wall around New York or adapt?

      Oh, right - we took money from Inlanders to rebuild New Orleans right where it was so that can happen again with the next Katrina and we can tax and spend again.

      Everything is about protecting the bankers' investments with the wages of the lower class, not making smart moves for future humans.

      I brought property at 1300' in the 90's and the other side of the mountain has sandy soils.

      I don't know why I should be taxed so the people who can roll out of bed and walk on the beach don't have to spend any of their own money. They get the benefits with no costs? That's a disastrous incentive system, though it sounds lovely, but I did the responsible thing and built 90 minutes inland. Yeah, my descendants will have beach front property but not for several hundred years (and they'll have to fight off the banksters' armies).

      I suppose scuba diving the ruins of the current political and industrial base will be cool, though, but it will require serious pressure gear or a robust submersible. Far too deep for an open-water certification.

    • by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Saturday June 08, 2024 @10:16AM (#64533215)

      >The question who should bear these costs:

      Right now, we ought to start taxing oil at the well head to cover the cost of sequestering twice as much carbon as that oil will ultimately release into the environment.

      Good luck getting OPEC to cooperate, though.

    • https://ourworldindata.org/con... [ourworldindata.org]
      US: 25%
      EU: 22%
      China: 13%
      Russia: 10%
      India: 3%

      WTF does Russia have to show for its contribution? Oh right, oligarchs.
    • The right answer is:

      3. those who have emitted CO2 but didn't get anything out of it (technological development).

      See here https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]

  • Don't ask (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pitch2cv ( 1473939 ) on Saturday June 08, 2024 @03:25AM (#64532595)

    Don't ask what the planet can do for your country. Ask what your country can do for the planet.
    ~JFK

  • ... and find and implement technological solutions.

    Bloviating, and making political hay of it, doesn't seem to be working.

  • Crop yields are up! At least my garden seems to be doing a lot better this year.

  • I just did a word search on this page, and not one comment mentions "tipping point". Do people not get the concept, or is it just lost in all the chatter? We are either close to, or more likely are already past, the point where increasing warming is a self-sustaining process

    One mechanism at work is that when temperatures are higher, decomposition of dead plants and animals occurs faster. That process releases more CO2, which increases temperatures further, which accelerates decomposition. I also kills plant

    • by groobly ( 6155920 ) on Saturday June 08, 2024 @11:08AM (#64533335)

      Nothing about climate is simple. In addition to positive feedback, there is also negative feedback, for example increased evaporation leading to more cloud cover. Figuring out which dominates in any particular regime is not easy, and deciding when there is a runaway positive feedback ("tipping point") is even harder.

  • Until about 2012/2013, CO2 levels were less than 400 ppm.

    And it is increasing by nearly 2 ppm PER YEAR ...

    Yet, we have minimizers, denialists, shills, ...etc. on this web site and elsewhere ...

  • When has CO_2 not reached unprecedented levels?

  • All that jet fuel to send a dignitary or celebrity and their entourage is making far more of a climate impact than me working from home with an electric car in my garage.
  • The summary didn't claim that this result was unexpected, and I can think of several reasons why it *should* be expected.

    One of the reasons is that the solubility of CO2 in water depends on the temperature of the water, and the surface temperature of the oceans has been rising. (The ocean is where the majority of the CO2 emitted over the last few centuries has ended up.)

    Another is that melting permafrost releases CO2 and methane that has been isolated since the last glaciation.

    There are others.

  • here we all are, the human race, healthier and with greater life spans than 99.99% of all the humans who have lived before us.

    My point is NOT that there's nothing to think about or be concerned about, but rather that people have been pushing the "we're all gonna DIE!" style alarmism since the 1970s and NONE of the nightmarish scenarios has actually occurred. Cry wolf over and over again, with extreme predictions, in some misguided attempt to swing public opinion and you are setting yourself up for massive d

  • OK why with ESG and such is there no pressure on Lennar, Toll Brothers, etc to stop building these outrageous spread out single family home subdivisions where car use is mandatory rather than high density skyscrapers and public transit and 15 minute cities where car use is optional? Why is there not more effort on getting urban growth boundaries in place and removing height restrictions inside the UGB? Something is financing this boom in subdivisions that also eats into farmland and timberland which are low

If you fail to plan, plan to fail.

Working...