New calculations prove all human CO2 emitted since 1750 has added only 31 ppm (parts per million) of CO2 to the atmosphere, and natural CO2 has added 100 ppm.
All human carbon has added only one per cent to the carbon in Earth’s carbon cycle. Nature has added much more carbon to the carbon cycle than humans have added.
The new calculations use data from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). IPCC claims the CO2 level was 280 ppm in 1750, and human CO2 added the 131 ppm to get today’s 411 ppm. But IPCC’s calculations are in serious error.
The new calculations show IPCC stumbled badly in its calculation of the human carbon cycle and IPCC’s errors are responsible for all the false climate alarmism today.
The new calculations fully account for the addition of human carbon to the carbon cycle and the recycling of human carbon between carbon reservoirs. These calculations show, for the first time, the true effect of human CO2 emissions on the carbon cycle.
The new calculations show human CO2 does not cause climate change. And no amount of reduction of CO2 emissions will have any measurable effect on climate change. Nature controls the level of atmospheric CO2.
The new calculations invalidate the handwaving arguments that human CO2 emissions are a threat to the planet. They are not a threat to the planet.
This new information makes fraudulent all claims, laws, actions, and treaties that seek to reduce CO2 emissions.
The new calculations are so simple that their relative accuracy cannot be denied. Henceforth, no one can argue, using accepted physics, that the human-caused increase in 2020 is larger than 31 ppm.
The carbon cycle has four key carbon reservoirs: land, atmosphere, surface ocean, and deep ocean.
IPCC’s AR5 Figure 6.1 shows IPCC’s data for the natural and human carbon cycles. The black numbers represent the natural carbon cycle. The red numbers represent the human carbon cycle.
Figure 1 shows IPCC’s numbers for the natural carbon cycle as percentages of total carbon. The percentages in each reservoir are the “fingerprint” of the carbon cycle at equilibrium.
No long-term effect from human CO2
Human and natural carbon atoms are identical. Therefore, nature treats human carbon exactly like it treats natural carbon. Therefore, if human emissions were to stop, human carbon would approach the same equilibrium percentages, the same “fingerprint,” as natural carbon.
Before doing any calculations, this natural fingerprint proves there will be no long-term effect of human carbon emissions on the carbon cycle or on the level of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Figure 1 shows only 1.45 per cent of natural carbon is in the atmosphere. Therefore, in the long term, only 1.45 per cent of all human carbon will be in the atmosphere.
IPCC made serious errors in its human carbon cycle.
Figure 2 shows IPCC’s human carbon cycle as of about 2013.
IPCC shows 66 percent of human carbon is still in the atmosphere. Where did IPCC get 66 percent?
Well, it takes 66 percent of all human carbon to produce the 113 ppm that IPCC needs to add to 280 ppm to get 393 ppm that was measured in about 2013.
In other words, the IPCC did not calculate 66 per cent using the carbon cycle. IPCC simply set its human carbon numbers to support its invalid assumption that human emissions have caused ALL the increase in CO2 above 280 ppm.
IPCC’s method is called “circular reasoning” or “garbage in, garbage out.” IPCC’s “garbage in” caused obvious errors in its human carbon cycle that IPCC was too oblivious to recognize.
Here are IPCC’s obvious errors that everyone should catch.
In the beginning, there was no human carbon in any of nature’s carbon reservoirs. Then human carbon began to flow into the atmosphere. From the atmosphere, human carbon flowed to the land and to the surface ocean. Once in the surface ocean, human carbon flowed to the deep ocean.
Figure 2 shows human carbon in the deep ocean but no human carbon in the surface ocean.
Question 1: How did 42 per cent of the human carbon get to the deep ocean without first adding any human carbon to the surface ocean?
Answer: It can’t.
Figure 2 shows human carbon in the land is negative.
Question 2: How did human carbon flowing from the atmosphere to the land subtract 8 per cent from the land?
Answer: It can’t. A negative level is impossible because all human carbon is positive. A negative carbon level is like having a glass filled with negative water.
Question 3: Why did not someone in the IPCC catch these obvious errors?
Answer: The IPCC must be incompetent in science and outright liars to produce the garbage it feeds you about human-caused climate change.
The very significant difference in the percentages in Figures 1 and 2 proves the IPCC treats human carbon differently than it treats natural carbon. That violates physics because nature will treat human and natural carbon the same.
How to calculate the human carbon cycle correctly.
Here’s the thing. Human carbon must obey the same physics rules as natural carbon.
But IPCC uses different physical rules for human carbon than for natural carbon.
Therefore, IPCC’s human CO2 claims and IPCC’s climate models are junk science.
The Physics model – described in my scientific paper – easily finds IPCC’s hidden rules for natural carbon. Then the Physics model applies these same rules to human carbon.
The Physics model makes year-by-year calculations of the human carbon cycle beginning in 1750. Each year, it adds the IPCC-approved annual estimate of human carbon to the atmosphere and allows human carbon to flow from reservoir to reservoir according to the rules for natural carbon.
Figure 3 shows the result of the Physics model calculations at the end of 2019.
Only 15 per cent of all human carbon remains in the atmosphere by 2020. That 15 per cent is equal to 31 ppm.
In 2020, both human carbon and natural carbon have added carbon to the carbon cycle. This has increased atmospheric CO2 from IPCC’s 280 ppm to 411 ppm, or by 131 ppm.
If the natural CO2 level had stayed at 280 ppm, as IPCC claims, then human CO2 would have added 31 pm to give a total of 311 pm. Therefore, the natural CO2 level must have increased by 100 ppm, from 280 to 380, to produce the CO2 level at the end of 2019.
Human carbon has added 31 ppm or about 25 per cent of the new carbon. Nature has added 100 ppm or about 75% of the new carbon.
IPCC’s human carbon cycle calculations are invalid because IPCC based its calculations on its assumption that human CO2 emissions caused all the CO2 increase above 280 ppm. IPCC refused to test its assumption. IPCC made its assumption an alarmist claim.
The Physics model has tested IPCC’s assumption and proved it is wrong.
How human carbon would change if all human CO2 emissions stopped in 2020.
The Physics model shows how human carbon would flow from the atmosphere to the other carbon reservoirs if human CO2 emissions stopped in 2020.
Figure 4 shows the percentages of human carbon in each carbon reservoir in 2100 under the assumption that all human CO2 emissions stopped in 2020.
The percentages in Figure 4 have moved toward the percentages in Figure 1. Most human carbon has moved to the deep ocean. Very little remains in the atmosphere and surface ocean.
Only 4 percent of human carbon would remain in the atmosphere by 2100. That is equivalent to an increase in atmospheric CO2 of 8 ppm. That amount of increase cannot cause any measurable climate change.
A significant percentage, 19 percent, of human carbon remains in the land.
Where did the new natural carbon come from?
The Physics model indicates the warming of the Earth after the Little Ice Age caused carbon stored in the oceans and land to be released into the carbon cycle.
IPCC made serious blunders in its calculation of the human carbon cycle. IPCC’s blunders are the source and basis of all climate alarmism. IPCC’s climate blunders have worked their way into legal decisions, legislation, government regulations, and business decisions.
The new calculations, amazingly simple, prove the IPCC errored in its calculation of the human effect on climate.
There is no valid scientific basis for climate alarmism.