As promised in a number of climate related posts during the closing months of 2023 and also just a few days ago, I have finally gotten around to doing it. There have been many other issues coming to a head now and for some time in the past that have occupied the thinking space concerning the future and it may be that climate will be one of the last things occupying our minds in the days ahead. But anyway, for what it is worth…
First Risk – Dangerous Levels Of Atmospheric CO2
Please do not skip this because you think you know what it will be saying. Let me surprise you.
We should not need reminding that for some time over the last century or more, and this is not a new phenomena having become gradually more acute over the past 2-3 million years, and until recently becoming a threat to all life on Earth, the planet has been suffering from expanding desertification. Populations living in various parts of the world having needed to migrate some distance in order to survive as both fresh water sources dry up and vegetation is unable to flourish.
There is only one basic reason for this. Life cannot flourish or even persist without adequate levels of atmospheric CO2.
The level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been falling since even before the dinosaur extinction some 60+ million years ago, at which time it stood at around 2,000 parts per million (ppm) as a minor constituent of air. It had been as high as 3,000 ppm in earlier times. By 20 to 40 million years ago that level had reduced to around 1,000 ppm, which was still adequate – in fact perhaps the ideal level for CO2 in terms of plant generation and living conditions for the mammalian creatures which flourished then, during the Oligocene and Miocene periods. CO2 continued to fall, I will explain why in a moment, until for most of the last million years it reached rock bottom somewhere between 200-300 ppm. If things had worsened from that or even remained the same for much longer, all life would have vanished from the Earth. But, nature has the balance. The situation has begun to improve. CO2 levels began to rise in the last 150 years or so, and now stand at something over 450 ppm. That level needs to at least double or even triple for our planet to re-green itself. You may find that astounding, but it is true.
Unfortunately, a recently introduced species of intelligent mammalian hominids suddenly discovered vast energy sources in the ground, which they could utilise to make life more comfortable and at the same time much more complex for themselves. These air-breathers realised they could build huge manufacturing complexes, mining sites and other paraphernalia of civilisation. They began to think of themselves as King of the Heap. They were invincible. Eventually they noticed things were becoming warmer than they had been, without also recognising that this was a natural feature of climate progression or cycling. So they looked for something to blame and saw opportunity in the increase of CO2 in the air they breathed. Though not large in volume, it was going in the right direction to possibly be the root of the problem. But you can’t blame an inanimate object for anything so they determined it was all their own fault for doing the things they were doing. It wasn’t of course, but desperation often causes one to miss the blindingly obvious. And they liked the benefits of what they were doing and so determined to themselves finding ways of stopping the rise in CO2 so that they could keep doing those things for as long as they wanted. Eventually, by following circular logic, they destroyed everything they relied on for life and all fell down dead, proving they were not really as intelligent as they thought they were [Well, that’s the best, shortest, and least controversial ending I could think of for this story].
These air-breathers could at least have achieved a better outcome by contemplating in greater depth why this situation had arisen in the first place. Why did CO2 levels start to decline, along roughly the same trajectory as Earth’s surface temperatures? Is there a correlation? The short answer is, no, there is no correlation or proof that levels of CO2 have any effect on global temperatures, and anyone who tells you different is a liar. Sometimes they go up together, sometimes down. At other times they move in opposite directions. So let’s stop blaming CO2 for our problems. I wrote the following article on making CO2 our friend back in December – Gotta Love CO2. It’s The Best.
So, what is the cause of the excess heat? It’s the methane, stupid. Or at least that is what we are led to believe. Although my observations do not always confirm that, but I can neither prove nor disprove it. The methane content of air is so small as to be unrecognisable in any superficial tabulation, less than 2 ppm to CO2 450+ ppm. Why is that, when we hear of vast eruptions of methane gas from underground sediments? It is because methane quickly (relatively) breaks down into other chemicals – including large amounts of CO2.
Let’s assume then that there is some tenuous connection between large amounts of methane and atmospheric heating. It is true that from time to time, perhaps more regularly than we know, methane erupts into the atmosphere and almost immediately begins to degrade into CO2 and other gases. That’s not hard to believe. Also that the resultant excess CO2 is taken up, mostly by plants I think, which use the carbon as building material and release the oxygen and the whole thing cycles around in general balance. Very little methane or CO2 remaining in the atmosphere on a more or less permanent basis, to provide any proof that anything has really changed.
So, and here is the crux of the matter, since the levels of atmospheric CO2 are increasing, this can only be that there is insufficient plant life currently on Earth to take up all that excess CO2 being released from degrading methane. You will also note that we are talking of minuscule amounts of CO2 – not the massive amounts said to be cause for alarm as a result of human activities. There are no ‘massive’ amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere. It is all within minimally normal ranges.
So, and I am going to emphasize this too, it is not human industry and technology which is at the root of rising global temperatures and other climatic disturbances, but the increase in desertification and consequent reduced plant growth arising from the long-term reduction in atmospheric CO2.
The answer? There is no answer, because there is no problem. Nature is restoring the balance, but it will take time. Desertification will be rolled back. We can help by not trying to reduce already dangerously low levels of atmospheric CO2. Instead, by growing more trees and other vegetation, eliminating fertilizer and insecticide use, and ceasing to destroy the existing trees and vegetation we have – including as a result of forever wars.
Before I close, I am going to split this into at least one more future part. The next severe risk to be discussed will be the very real risk of Earth becoming a frozen planet. The final risk I plan to make on the basis of perturbations within the data of unknown origin and unknown effect. I have not yet reached a conclusion as to whether those two can be fused together.
Don’t worry, none of these things can effect either my or your life. We only need to concern ourselves with watching for signs of beginning of the downturn in the current climate cycle. None of us, I think, will need to ‘rug up’ any more than we do right now, but some of us may eventually need to move home due to as yet unobserved climate drivers. Aw, heck! There is still a chance you may need to do that from current climate drivers.
Not Something Else 
Leave a comment