A balance-level approximation to Berry’s carbon cycle calculation
by Dr. Ed Berry
(editing in process)
The IPCC assumes the natural CO2 level in 1750 was 280 ppm and the human CO2 level was zero.
We define “human carbon” as the carbon that enters the carbon cycle as a result of human CO2 emissions.
We define “natural carbon” as carbon in the carbon cycle that is not added by human CO2 emissions.
These definitions apply to the IPCC’s “fast” carbon cycle.
Human carbon atoms retain their identity forever, even as they flow from land or ocean back into the atmosphere.
These definitions are critical because, to calculate the effect of human CO2 on CO2 levels, we must keep track of human carbon atoms in our calculations.
We use balance levels to calculate a “first-order” approximation of the amount that human CO2 adds to the CO2 balance level.
Since human and natural CO2 have the same e-time, we can use (3) to write:
Balance Level (H) /Inflow (H) = Balance Level (N) / Inflow (N) (6)
Balance Level (H) / Balance Level (N) = Inflow (H) / Inflow (N)
Balance Level (H) / 280 ppm = 0.03 / 0.97
Balance Level (H) = 280 * 0.03 / 0.97
Balance Level (H) = 8 ppm (7)
This first approximation shows that human CO2 inflow results in a human CO2 balance of about 8 ppm. This is nowhere near the 140 ppm required for human CO2 to account for all the CO2 increase.
Berry (2021) reports a value greater than 8 ppm but nowhere near 140 ppm.
How the IPCC claims Assumption (1) is true.
The IPCC simply claims the half-life of human CO2 is much larger than 2.4 years. Let’s assume, for example, that the IPCC says the human CO2 half-life is 20 times 2.4 years, or 24 years.
To approximate the effect of IPCC’s claim, we multiply the right side of equation (6) by 20 and carry this down to equation (7), which multiplies 8 ppm by 20 to get 160 ppm.
This is an example of how the IPCC and the CO2 Coalition both claim Assumption (1) is true.
How CEP proves this modification is invalid.
The CEP says the half-lives of human and natural CO2 are identical, which violates our multiplying the right-hand side of equation (6) by 20.
The key point is that all climate laws and regulations violate CEP.