How to calculate IPCC’s human carbon cycle

by Dr. Ed Berry

(editing in process)

In Porto (2018), I introduced the equations that describe how carbon and CO2 flow through the IPCC carbon cycle. Berry (2019, 2021, 2023) shows the equations I used to calculate IPCC’s true human carbon cycle.

Here are the important features of my formulation:

1. My carbon cycle model replicates IPCC’s natural carbon cycle data and shows how IPCC’s natural carbon cycle could keep a constant CO2 level of 280 ppm. IPCC never showed a carbon cycle model like this.
2. My carbon cycle model then calculates IPCC’s human carbon cycle by using IPCC’s natural carbon cycle e-times. It begins with all four reservoirs empty and numerically inserts annual data on human carbon emissions into the atmosphere, and allows human carbon to flow through the carbon cycle exactly as IPCC’s natural carbon flows through the natural carbon cycle.
3. The result shows human emissions added about 33 ppm to atmospheric CO2 as of 2020 using IPCC’s own data, which conflicts with IPCC’s claim that human CO2 causes all the CO2 increase.

Here’s what most scientists miss about how I calculate IPCC’s human carbon cycle.

Berry calculates IPCC’s true human carbon cycle independently from IPCC’s natural carbon cycle. This follows the physics Partition Principle. We can add human- and natural-origin carbon at any time to get the carbon cycle.

We can make this separation and addition because equation (2) shows that outflow is a linear function of Level and e-time.

We calculate the human and natural carbon cycles separately, so we can conserve carbon mass independently for each.

If we put human and natural carbon into a single equation (as the CO2 Coalition does), we conserve only total carbon mass, not the individual masses of human and natural carbon.

Berry shows that if we stopped human emissions, human CO2 would drop from 33 ppm to 14 ppm in 20 years and 10 ppm in 40 years. This proves human CO2 is not a long-term danger.

The key point is IPCC’s true human carbon cycle proves Assumption (1) is false.