The impact of human CO2 on atmospheric CO2 – Summary

Ed Berry, PhD, Theoretical Physics, CCM

Click here to read Ed Berry’s 2023 paper and debate.

Copyright (c) 2022 by Edwin X Berry. Permission granted to republish with link to Berry (2021). Download pdf.

Introduction

Climate change: myth or reality.

This summary of Berry (2021) shows the main points without the math.

1. How CO₂ flows out of the atmosphere.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) correctly assumes the outflow of CO₂ from the atmosphere is proportional to the CO₂ level divided by a time constant.

This time constant – that the IPCC calls “turnover time” and we call “e-time” – describes how fast CO₂ flows out of the atmosphere.

IPCC (2007, p. 948) defines “turnover time” equal to the first power of the carbon level divided by the outflow of carbon from the reservoir,

“Turnover time (T) is the ratio of the mass M of a reservoir (e.g., a gaseous compound in the atmosphere) and the total rate of removal S from the reservoir: T = M / S. For each removal process, separate turnover times can be defined.”

IPCC (2007, p. 948) says the turnover time (T) for natural CO₂ is about four years.

“Carbon dioxide (CO₂) is an extreme example. Its turnover time is only about four years because of the rapid exchange between the atmosphere and the ocean and terrestrial biota.”

IPCC’s data for its natural carbon cycle (IPCC, 2013, p. 470-471) show the e-time for atmospheric CO₂ is 3.5 years, supporting IPCC’s statement of “about four years.”

Simple physics shows when outflow is proportional to the first power of level, natural and human carbon cycles are independent. So, we can calculate these carbon cycles independently and then add them up to get the total. We need only to calculate the human carbon cycle over time to see how human CO₂ changes atmospheric CO₂.

2. The first approximation conflicts with IPCC claims.

IPCC’s data show the inflow of human CO₂ into the atmosphere is about 5% of the total CO₂ inflow and natural CO₂ is about 95%.

Since human and natural CO₂ molecules are identical, their e-times are identical. Therefore, to the first approximation, the composition of today’s atmospheric CO₂ is about 5% human and 95% natural.

Yet, IPCC (2013, p. 467, Executive Summary) says,

“With a very high level of confidence, the increase in CO₂ emis­sions from fossil fuel burning and those arising from land use change are the dominant cause of the observed increase in atmospheric CO₂ concentration.”

IPCC (2013, pp. 470-471) assumes the natural CO₂ level remained at 280 ppm after 1750 and, therefore, human CO₂ caused all the CO₂ increase since 1750. This would make human CO₂ about 32% of 415 ppm as of 2020.

How can a 5% inflow cause 32% of the CO₂ level?

It can’t. Even the IPCC realizes this problem. So, to support its claim that human CO₂ causes dangerous climate change, the IPCC incorrectly claims human CO₂ stays in the atmosphere longer than natural CO₂.

IPCC (2013, p. 469) incorrectly claims:

“The removal of human-emitted CO₂ from the atmosphere by natural processes will take a few hundred thousand years (high confidence). … about 15 to 40% of emitted CO₂ will remain in the atmosphere longer than 1,000 years. This long time required … to remove anthropogenic CO₂ makes climate change caused by elevated CO₂ irreversible on human time scale.”

This IPCC claim violates IPCC’s own data-based e-time and ignores that human and natural CO₂ molecules are identical, and therefore their e-times are identical.

3. The second approximation proves the IPCC is wrong.

The first approximation considered only the atmosphere. The second approximation uses IPCC’s four-reservoir carbon cycle model. The physics model, using outflow proportional to level and IPCC’s e-times, replicates IPCC’s natural carbon cycle, shown in Figure 1.

Then, this same model calculates a human carbon cycle compatible with IPCC’s natural carbon cycle, using recursive, annual time steps from 1750 to 2020, shown Figure 2.

This compatible human carbon cycle shows human CO₂ has added only 33 ppm (8%) while nature has added 100 ppm (92%) to IPCC’s 280 ppm level in 1750, as of 2020.

According to the scientific method, the physics model has proved IPCC’s claim – that human CO₂ caused all the CO₂ increase above 280 ppm – is false.

Good high-school students can learn how the physics model works.

4. IPCC’s natural carbon cycle

Figure 1 shows IPCC’s natural carbon cycle at equilibrium with atmospheric CO₂ at 280 ppm (589 PgC). The boxes show reservoirs and arrows the flows between reservoirs.

Figure 1 shows 1.4% of natural carbon is in the atmosphere and 90% is in the deep ocean. This is an equilibrium fingerprint that human carbon will approach.

5. Physics model applied to human carbon.

Figure 2 shows the physics carbon cycle model with IPCC’s four reservoirs and six outflows, where the arrows are all positive numbers.

Human carbon has added only one percent to the total carbon in the natural carbon cycle.

Figure 3 shows how the reservoir levels change with time for human carbon.

The purple dashed line shows the cumulative human carbon since 1750. The solid bold line shows the measured atmospheric carbon level above 280 ppmv.

Data alone prove natural CO₂ increased the CO₂ level above 280 ppm. The cumulative “New Human carbon added” before 1955 is less than measured “atmospheric carbon,” making it impossible for human carbon to have caused all the CO₂ increase.

The red dashed line shows human CO₂ added to the atmosphere is much less than the “New Human carbon added” because the CO₂ e-time of 3.5 years lets CO₂ flow out of the atmosphere much faster than it can accumulate.

6. The Bern model uses IPCC’s assumption.

Figure 4 compares the physics model with the Bern model.

The key difference between the Bern model and the physics model is the Bern model uses IPCC’s invalid assumption that human CO₂ causes all the CO₂ increase while the physics model uses IPCC’s e-time of 3.5 years.

7. Isotope data show CO₂ increase is natural.

Figure 5 shows

• ¹⁴C data (black solid line) and its curve fit after 1970 (black dashed line).
• ¹⁴C data relative to the δ¹⁴C value in 1970 (blue sawtooth line) and its curve fit.
• ¹²CO₂ data in ppm (red sawtooth line).

δ¹⁴C is a measure of the ¹⁴C / ¹²C ratio. The natural level of δ¹⁴C is zero.

Human CO₂ has no ¹⁴C, so its δ¹⁴C is -1000. If human CO₂ were 32% of the CO₂ in the atmosphere, it would dilute the natural δ¹⁴C level from zero to -320.

Data show δ¹⁴C has returned to its natural level of zero even as ¹²C (red line) has increased, showing that natural CO₂ has dominated the increase in atmosphere CO₂.

The ¹⁴C curve fit shows ¹⁴CO₂ e-time is 10.0 years (Hardy and Salby, 2021; Berry, 2021). The ¹²CO₂ e-time is smaller than the ¹⁴CO₂ e-time because the ¹⁴C atom is heavier than the ¹²C atom. This confirms that the e-time for ¹²CO₂ is less than 10.0 years.

Conclusions

The simple physics model – using IPCC’s outflow proportional to level and e-times –proves natural CO₂ controls atmospheric CO₂. As of 2020, natural CO₂ has added about 100 ppm, and human CO₂ only 33 ppm, to IPCC’s CO₂ level of 280 ppm in 1750.

References

Berry, E. X, 2021: The impact of human CO₂ on atmospheric CO₂. Science of Climate Change, December 14, 2021, The impact of human CO₂ on atmospheric CO₂ – SCC (klimarealistene.com); https://doi.org/10.53234/scc202112/212  

Harde, H. and Salby, M. L., 2021: What Controls the Atmosphere CO₂ Level? Science of Climate Change, August 2021. https://doi.org/10.53234/scc202111/28. https://scc.klimarealistene.com/produkt/what-controls-the-atmospheric-CO₂-level/

IPCC, 2013: Ciais, P., Sabine, et al. 2013: Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles. The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Cambridge University Press, UK and New York, NY, USA. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter06_FINAL.pdf

IPCC. 2007: Climate Change 2007 – The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group 1 to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Annex 1: Glossary: Lifetime. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar4-wg1-annexes-1.pdf

Copyright (c) 2022 by Edwin X Berry. Permission to republish with link to Berry (2021) granted