CO2 ennen teollistumista - Jaworowski ja Beck

Seuraa 
Viestejä45973
Liittynyt3.9.2015

Kaksi tunnettua Co2-tutkijaa, Zbiegniew Jaworowski ja Ernst Beck ovat tutkimuksissaan kyseenalaistaneet teorian, jonka mukaan Co2-taso olisi ennen teollistumista pysynyt tasolla 260-280 ppmv ja hypähtäneet sitten nopeaan nousuun.

Jaworowskin näkemyksiä:

Statement of Prof. Zbigniew Jaworowski
Chairman, Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection
Warsaw, Poland

I am a Professor at the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection (CLOR) in Warsaw, Poland, a governmental institution, involved in environmental studies. CLOR has a "Special Liaison" relationship with the US National Council on Radiological Protection and Measurements (NCRP). In the past, for about ten years, CLOR closely cooperated with the US Environmental Protection Agency, in research on the influence of industry and nuclear explosions on pollution of the global environment and population. I published about 280 scientific papers, among them about 20 on climatic problems. I am the representative of Poland in the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), and in 1980-1982 I was the chairman of this Committee.

For the past 40 years I was involved in glacier studies, using snow and ice as a matrix for reconstruction of history of man-made pollution of the global atmosphere. A part of these studies was related to the climatic issues. Ice core records of CO2 have been widely used as a proof that, due to man's activity the current atmospheric level of CO2 is about 25% higher than in the pre-industrial period. These records became the basic input parameters in the models of the global carbon cycle and a cornerstone of the man-made climatic warming hypothesis. These records do not represent the atmospheric reality, as I will try to demonstrate in my statement.

Relevant Background

In order to study the history of industrial pollution of the global atmosphere, between 1972 and 1980, I organized 11 glacier expeditions, which measured natural and man-made pollutants in contemporary and ancient precipitation, preserved in 17 glaciers in Arctic, Antarctic, Alaska, Norway, the Alps, the Himalayas, the Ruwenzori Mountains in Uganda, the Peruvian Andes and in Tatra Mountains in Poland. I also measured long-term changes of dust in the troposphere and stratosphere, and the lead content in humans living in Europe and elsewhere during the past 5000 years. In 1968 I published the first paper on lead content in glacier ice[1]. Later I demonstrated that in pre-industrial period the total flux of lead into the global atmosphere was higher than in the 20th century, that the atmospheric content of lead is dominated by natural sources, and that the lead level in humans in Medieval Ages was 10 to 100 times higher than in the 20th century. In the 1990s I was working in the Norwegian Polar Research Institute in Oslo, and in the Japanese National Institute of Polar Research in Tokyo. In this period I studied the effects of climatic change on polar regions, and the reliability of glacier studies for estimation of CO2 concentration in the ancient atmosphere.

False Low Pre-industrial CO2 in the Atmosphere

Determinations of CO2 in polar ice cores are commonly used for estimations of the pre-industrial CO2 atmospheric levels. Perusal of these determinations convinced me that glaciological studies are not able to provide a reliable reconstruction of CO2 concentrations in the ancient atmosphere. This is because the ice cores do not fulfill the essential closed system criteria. One of them is a lack of liquid water in ice, which could dramatically change the chemical composition the air bubbles trapped between the ice crystals. This criterion, is not met, as even the coldest Antarctic ice (down to -73°C) contains liquid water[2]. More than 20 physico-chemical processes, mostly related to the presence of liquid water, contribute to the alteration of the original chemical composition of the air inclusions in polar ice[3].

One of these processes is formation of gas hydrates or clathrates. In the highly compressed deep ice all air bubbles disappear, as under the influence of pressure the gases change into the solid clathrates, which are tiny crystals formed by interaction of gas with water molecules. Drilling decompresses cores excavated from deep ice, and contaminates them with the drilling fluid filling the borehole. Decompression leads to dense horizontal cracking of cores, by a well known sheeting process. After decompression of the ice cores, the solid clathrates decompose into a gas form, exploding in the process as if they were microscopic grenades. In the bubble-free ice the explosions form a new gas cavities and new cracks[4]. Through these cracks, and cracks formed by sheeting, a part of gas escapes first into the drilling liquid which fills the borehole, and then at the surface to the atmospheric air. Particular gases, CO2, O2 and N2 trapped in the deep cold ice start to form clathrates, and leave the air bubbles, at different pressures and depth. At the ice temperature of -15°C dissociation pressure for N2 is about 100 bars, for O2 75 bars, and for CO2 5 bars. Formation of CO2 clathrates starts in the ice sheets at about 200 meter depth, and that of O2 and N2 at 600 to 1000 meters. This leads to depletion of CO2 in the gas trapped in the ice sheets. This is why the records of CO2 concentration in the gas inclusions from deep polar ice show the values lower than in the contemporary atmosphere, even for the epochs when the global surface temperature was higher than now.

The data from shallow ice cores, such as those from Siple, Antarctica[5, 6], are widely used as a proof of man-made increase of CO2 content in the global atmosphere, notably by IPCC[7]. These data show a clear inverse correlation between the decreasing CO2 concentrations, and the load-pressure increasing with depth (Figure 1 A) . The problem with Siple data (and with other shallow cores) is that the CO2 concentration found in pre-industrial ice from a depth of 68 meters (i.e. above the depth of clathrate formation) was "too high". This ice was deposited in 1890 AD, and the CO2 concentration was 328 ppmv, not about 290 ppmv, as needed by man-made warming hypothesis. The CO2 atmospheric concentration of about 328 ppmv was measured at Mauna Loa, Hawaii as later as in 1973[8], i.e. 83 years after the ice was deposited at Siple.

An ad hoc assumption, not supported by any factual evidence[3, 9], solved the problem: the average age of air was arbitrary decreed to be exactly 83 years younger than the ice in which it was trapped. The "corrected" ice data were then smoothly aligned with the Mauna Loa record (Figure 1 B) , and reproduced in countless publications as a famous "Siple curve". Only thirteen years later, in 1993, glaciologists attempted to prove experimentally the "age assumption"[10], but they failed[9].
The notion of low pre-industrial CO2 atmospheric level, based on such poor knowledge, became a widely accepted Holy Grail of climate warming models. The modelers ignored the evidence from direct measurements of CO2 in atmospheric air indicating that in 19th century its average concentration was 335 ppmv[11] (Figure 2) . In Figure 2 encircled values show a biased selection of data used to demonstrate that in 19th century atmosphere the CO2 level was 292 ppmv[12]. A study of stomatal frequency in fossil leaves from Holocene lake deposits in Denmark, showing that 9400 years ago CO2 atmospheric level was 333 ppmv, and 9600 years ago 348 ppmv, falsify the concept of stabilized and low CO2 air concentration until the advent of industrial revolution [13].

Improper manipulation of data, and arbitrary rejection of readings that do not fit the pre-conceived idea on man-made global warming is common in many glaciological studies of greenhouse gases. In peer reviewed publications I exposed this misuse of science [3, 9]. Unfortunately, such misuse is not limited to individual publications, but also appears in documents of national and international organizations. For example IPCC not only based its reports on a falsified "Siple curve", but also in its 2001 report[14] used as a flagship the "hockey curve" of temperature, showing that there was no Medieval Warming, and no Little Ice Age, and that the 20th century was unusually warm. The curve was credulously accepted after Mann et al. paper published in NATURE magazine[15]. In a crushing criticism, two independent groups of scientists from disciplines other than climatology [16, 17] (i.e. not supported from the annual pool of many billion "climatic" dollars), convincingly blamed the Mann et al. paper for the improper manipulation and arbitrary rejections of data. The question arises, how such methodically poor paper, contradicting hundreds of excellent studies that demonstrated existence of global range Medieval Warming and Little Ice Age, could pass peer review for NATURE? And how could it pass the reviewing process at the IPCC? The apparent scientific weaknesses of IPCC and its lack of impartiality, was diagnosed and criticized in the early 1990s in NATURE editorials [18, 19]. The disease, seems to be persistent.

Conclusion

The basis of most of the IPCC conclusions on anthropogenic causes and on projections of climatic change is the assumption of low level of CO2 in the pre-industrial atmosphere. This assumption, based on glaciological studies, is false. Therefore IPCC projections should not be used for national and global economic planning. The climatically inefficient and economically disastrous Kyoto Protocol, based on IPCC projections, was correctly defined by President George W. Bush as "fatally flawed". This criticism was recently followed by the President of Russia Vladimir V. Putin. I hope that their rational views might save the world from enormous damage that could be induced by implementing recommendations based on distorted science.




Ernst Beckin tutkimustulokset:

Jaworowski tukee Beckin näkemyksiä, sillä hänen aikaisemmat tutkimustulokset ovat olleet samansuuntaisia.

[/quote]

Sivut

Kommentit (23)

Vierailija

Kyseisten herrojen tutkimustulokset vahvistavat sitä näkemystä, ettei ilmasto ole suinkaan sen paremmin lämpötilan kuin Co2 pitoisuudenkaan mukaan vakaa. Muutoksia on aina ollut ja tulee aina olemaan. Ja muutokset ovat pääsääntöisesti täysin ihmisen toiminnasta riippumattomia.

Vierailija
ralf64
Kyseisten herrojen tutkimustulokset vahvistavat sitä näkemystä, ettei ilmasto ole suinkaan sen paremmin lämpötilan kuin Co2 pitoisuudenkaan mukaan vakaa. Muutoksia on aina ollut ja tulee aina olemaan. Ja muutokset ovat pääsääntöisesti täysin ihmisen toiminnasta riippumattomia.

Beck on tehnyt melkoisen työn selvitellessään ongelmaa, joka liittyy ns. esiteollisen ajan hiilidioksiditason määrittämiseen.
Yksityiskohtainen dokumentaatio löytyy täältä:
http://www.biokurs.de/treibhaus/180CO2_supp.htm

Vierailija

Olen ihmetellyt sitä miten kritiikittömästi osa tiedemaailmasta on sisäistänyt George Callendarin teorian vakaasta hiilidioksiiditasosta tuhansia vuosia ennen teollistumista, vaikka kaikkien tutkimustulosten mukaan näytteiden Co2-pitoisuuksissa on valtavia heittoja. Callendar poisti aineistoistaan kaikki sellaiset mittausarvot jotka osoittivat Co2 arvojen olleen yli 400 ppmv ja suurimman osan 350 ppmv:n ylittävistä arvoista. Callendarin omista papereista löytyi tietoja jopa yli 2000 ppmv: arvosta ja nuo hän heitti välittömästi roskiin.

Vierailija

Korostetaan nyt kuitenkin sitäkin, että ei aikalaisistakaan läheskään kaikki nielleet sellaisenaan Callendarin näkemyksiä. Mm. Gilles Slocum piti Callendarin tutkimustuloksia tieteellisesti epäluotettavina.

Vierailija

Tuliko kenelleen muulle mieleen, että ehkä Beckin tutkimukset vähän mättävät, kun yhtäkkiä ilmakehään olisi tullut parissa vuodessa tyhjästä kymmeniä, jopa satoja miljardeja tonnia hiilidioksidia joka parin vuoden jälkeen olisi kadonnut yhtä tehokkaasti jälkiä jättämättä?

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... he-future/

"So what does the new CO2 “reconstruction” look like? For example, within 15 years CO2 levels rose from about 290ppm (1925) to about 470ppm (1942). Worse, within only 10 years these huge CO2 levels were absorbed again and came back to boring mainstream values of about 300ppm.

The list of arguments against such variability in the carbon cycle is too long even for a post on RC but here are a few of the main ones:
The fluxes necessary to produce such variations are just unbelievably huge. Modern fossil fuel emissions are about 7.5GT (Giga Tons) Carbon per year which would correspond to about 3.5ppm increase per year (except that about half is absorbed by natural sinks in the ocean and the terrestrial biosphere). Beck’s supposed 150ppm source/sink in a decade corresponds therefore to a CO2 production/absorption about ten times stronger than the entire global industrial production of 2007 (putting aside for the moment additional complications since such CO2 levels had to be equilibrated at least partly with the ocean and the real CO2 source must even be larger).

Such huge biospheric fluxes would leave an enormous 13C signal in the atmosphere. Nothing remotely like that is observed in tree ring cellulose data."

Jos Beck pystyy perustelemaan nuo lukunsa uskottavasti, niin ehkä minäkin annan jotain painoarvoa noille tutkimuksille.

Tässä muuten lisää Beckin loistavia tempauksia:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... -lesson-2/

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... illennium/

Tuo viimeinen on suosikkini. Otetaan vanha IPCC:n käyrä ja jatketaan sitä omin päineen. Vaihdetaan skaala 1 asteesta viisinkertaiseksi ja jätetään graafi ennalleen. Kritiikin takia muutetaan skaala vain 4,5-kertaiseksi.

"In fact his version suggests temperatures have warmed by 2 ºC since 1900, more than twice of what is actually observed!"

Taitaa olla ihan huumorimiehiä tämä saksalainen.

Vierailija

Suuretkin lyhyen ajan muutokset muuttuvat ymmärrettäviksi, jos lähestymistavaksi otetaan se, että kasvihuonekaasut ovat lämpöenergian seurauksia.

Beckin ja Jaworowskin tutkimusten suurin merkitys on siinä, että ne ovat tuoneet päivänvaloon Callendarin tutkimusten virheellisyydet. Miksi C poisti kaikki yli 400 ppmv näytteet?

Vierailija
ralf64
Suuretkin lyhyen ajan muutokset muuttuvat ymmärrettäviksi, jos lähestymistavaksi otetaan se, että kasvihuonekaasut ovat lämpöenergian seurauksia.

Beckin ja Jaworowskin tutkimusten suurin merkitys on siinä, että ne ovat tuoneet päivänvaloon Callendarin tutkimusten virheellisyydet. Miksi C poisti kaikki yli 400 ppmv näytteet?

Muuttuuko suuret lyhyen ajan muutokset sellaisiksi, että niistä ei jää minkäännäköisiä jälkiä radiohiilitutkimuksiin?

Callendarin tutkimukset eivät taida olla ainoita tutkimuksia CO2-pitoisuuksista. Kriittisyys ja epäilyttävien metodien esilletuominen on toki hyvä asia, mutta olisi hyvä, jos omat tutkimukset kestäisivät konkreettiset tämän päivän tutkimukset (viitaten tuohon satojen miljardien tonnien CO2-pitoisuuksien katoamiseen siten, ettei siitä jää jälkiä).

Tuosta omasta linkistäni:

"And most importantly, we know from ice core analysis the CO2 concentration from the pre-industrial to modern times. The results of three different Antarctic cores broadly confirm the picture of an accelerating rise of CO2 above levels of natural variability over the last 650.000 years"

Esim. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... ntrations/

Vierailija

Jaworowskin kritiikki ennen teollisuusaikakautta olevaa staattista Co2-tilannetta kohtaan lähtee niistä tutkimuksista, jotka ovat osoittaneet kuinka epäluotettavia tuloksia syvältä otettavat jäänäytteet ovat antaneet.

Ice, the IPCC believes, precisely preserves the ancient air, allowing for a precise reconstruction of the ancient atmosphere. For this to be true, no component of the trapped air can escape from the ice. Neither can the ice ever become liquid. Neither can the various gases within air ever combine or separate.

This perfectly closed system, frozen in time, is a fantasy. "Liquid water is common in polar snow and ice, even at temperatures as low as -72C," Dr. Jaworowski explains, "and we also know that in cold water, CO2 is 70 times more soluble than nitrogen and 30 times more soluble than oxygen, guaranteeing that the proportions of the various gases that remain in the trapped, ancient air will change. Moreover, under the extreme pressure that deep ice is subjected to -- 320 bars, or more than 300 times normal atmospheric pressure -- high levels of CO2 get squeezed out of ancient air."

Because of these various properties in ancient air, one would expect that, over time, ice cores that started off with high levels of CO2 would become depleted of excess CO2, leaving a fairly uniform base level of CO2 behind. In fact, this is exactly what the ice cores show.

"According to the ice-core samples, CO2 levels vary little over time," Dr. Jaworowski sates. "The ice core data from the Taylor Dome in Antarctica shows almost no change in the level of atmospheric CO2 over the last 7,000 to 8,000 years -- it varied between 260 parts per million and 264 parts per million.

"Yet other indicators of past CO2 levels, such as fossil leaf stomata, show that CO2 levels over the past 7,000 to 8,000 years varied by more than 50 parts per million, between 270 and 326 parts per million. We also know that there have been great fluctuations in temperature over that time period -- the Little Age just 500 years ago, for example. If the icecore record was reliable, and CO2 levels reflected temperatures, why wouldn't the ice-core data have shown CO2 levels to fall during the Little Ice Age? "

Dr. Jaworowski has devoted much of his professional life to the study of the composition of the atmosphere, as part of his work to understand the consequences of radioactive fallout from nuclear-weapons testing and nuclear reactor accidents. After taking numerous ice samples over the course of a dozen field trips to glaciers in six continents, and studying how contaminants travel through ice over time, he came to realize how fraught with error ice-core samples were in reconstructing the atmosphere. The Chernobyl accident, whose contaminants he studied in the 1990s in a Scandinavian glacier, provided the most illumination.

"This ice contained extremely high radioactivity of cesium-137 from the Chernobyl fallout, more than a thousand times higher than that found in any glacier from nuclear-weapons fallout, and more than 100 times higher than found elsewhere from the Chernobyl fallout," he explained. "This unique contamination of glacier ice revealed how particulate contaminants migrated, and also made sense of other discoveries I made during my other glacier expeditions. It convinced me that ice is not a closed system, suitable for an exact reconstruction of the composition of the past atmosphere."

Because of the high importance of this realization, in 1994 Dr. Jaworowski, together with a team from the Norwegian Institute for Energy Technics, proposed a research project on the reliability of trace-gas determinations in the polar ice. The prospective sponsors of the research refused to fund it, claiming the research would be "immoral" if it served to undermine the foundations of climate research.

The refusal did not come as a surprise. Several years earlier, in a peer-reviewed article published by the Norwegian Polar Institute, Dr. Jaworowski criticized the methods by which CO2 levels were ascertained from ice cores, and cast doubt on the global-warming hypothesis. The institute's director, while agreeing to publish his article, also warned Dr. Jaworowski that "this is not the way one gets research projects." Once published, the institute came under fire, especially since the report soon sold out and was reprinted. Said one prominent critic, "this paper puts the Norsk Polarinstitutt in disrepute." Although none of the critics faulted Dr. Jaworowski's science, the institute nevertheless fired him to maintain its access to funding.

Is there an alternative to ice-core samples, which are but proxies from which assumptions about the historical composition of the atmosphere can be made? "Yes, there are several other proxies, and they lead to different findings about CO2," Dr. Jaworowski states. "But we don't need to rely on proxies at all.

"Scientists from numerous disciplines have been examining CO2 since the beginning of the 19th century, and they have left behind a record of tens of thousands of direct, real-time measurements. These measurements tell a far different story about CO2 -- they demonstrate, for example, that CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere have fluctuated greatly, and that several times in the past 200 years CO2 concentrations have exceeded today's levels.

Vierailija
Yet other indicators of past CO2 levels, such as fossil leaf stomata, show that CO2 levels over the past 7,000 to 8,000 years varied by more than 50 parts per million, between 270 and 326 parts per million.



Höh?

Jaworowski tukee Beckin näkemyksiä, sillä hänen aikaisemmat tutkimustulokset ovat olleet samansuuntaisia.

Toinen väittää vaihteluvälin olevan 7000-8000 vuoden aikana 270-326 PPM ja toinen väittää vaihteluvälin olevan 270-470 PPM viimeisten 200 vuoden aikana.

Ei kovin samansuuntaisia tutkimuksia.

Vierailija

Samansuuntaisia, mutta Beckin tuloksissa näkyy yksittäisissä vuosissa suurempia heilahduksia.

Eräs mielenkiintoisempia asioita Beckin tutkimuksissa ovatkin lyhyen aikavälin heilahdukset. Kuten monet asioista perillä olevat tietävät, co2 arvot heilahtavat merkittävästi saman vuorokaudenkin aikana.

Ellen väärin muista jopa Callendarin tutkimustuloksissa näkyi valtavia eroja. Eräät näytteet antoivat jopa alle 70 ppmv tuloksia toiset jopa yli 2000 ppmv:n. Callendar näytti kuitenkin jo alunperinkin päättäneen, ettei 1800-luvulla ole yli 300 ppmv Co2-tasoa, joten hän surutta heitti pellolle kaikki yli 400 ppmv arvot ja suurimman osan 350 ppmv ylittävistä arvoista. Hän pääsi haluamaansa tulokseen - ja ihmiskunta pantiin tosiasioiden eteen.

Vierailija

Toita antarktiksen jääkairauksiahan on tehty useita. Kaikki tutkimukset tukevat pääpiirteittäin toisiaan. Heitettiinkö näissä kaikissa muissakin poikkeavat arvot romukoppaan?

Joka tapauksessa nuo Beckin tutkimukset ovat täysin epärealistisia, koska CO2:a ei voi ilmestyä kymmeniä tai satoja miljardeja tonneja ilmakehään tyhjästä. Kai myönnät, ettei CO2-pitoisuudet ole VOINEET olla 40-luvulla 470 ppm:n luokkaa? Jo siksi, että siitä olisi ollut pakko jäädä jälkiä ilmakehään.

Ja siksi toiseksi, mikä on todennäköisyys, että saman tien, kun CO2:a ryhdyttiin mittaamaan, se ryhtyi pysymään lähes viivasuorasti (hitaasti kohoten) kuosissa, jos se oli sitä ennen jatkuvasti heitellyt parisataa ppm edestakaisian harva se vuosi?

Vierailija

Jos hiilidioksiidimäärät heittelevät paljon saman vuorokauden sisällä niin mikä estäisi suurien muutosten olevan mahdollisia eri vuosina.

Vaikuttaa vahvasti siltä, että Callendar oli tietty visio jota hän seurasi. Kun tutkimustuloksissa löytyi 1800-luvun osalta "liian suuria Co2-pitoisuuksia" hän päätteli ne virheellisiksi. Callendar ei koskaan perustellut tieteellisesti miksi hän poisti yli 400 ppmv arvot.

Keskustella voidaan nyt niistä luonnollisista tekijöistä jotka saattavat viskellä Co2 arvoja jopa yli 20% lyhen ajan sisällä. Valtaosa Co2:sta ilmakehään tulee joka tapauksess meristä. Voisiko esim. 0,1 asteen lämpeneminen tietyllä viivellä nostaa voimakkaasti ilmakehän Co2-pitoisuutta? Entä lämpötilojen hetkellinen kohoaminen maanpinnalla? Entä pilvet, tuulet ja auringon aktiviteetti?

Jaworowski on tutkimuksissaan heittänyt selkeän epäilyksen varjon koko jäätiköiden Co2-pitoisuuksien tutkimuksista. Slocum teki saman jo aiemmin.

Vierailija

Noita antarktiksen jääkairauksiahan on tehty useita. Kaikki tutkimukset tukevat pääpiirteittäin toisiaan. Heitettiinkö näissä kaikissa muissakin poikkeavat arvot romukoppaan?

Ja mikä on todennäköisyys, että saman tien, kun CO2:a ryhdyttiin mittaamaan, se ryhtyi pysymään lähes viivasuorasti (hitaasti kohoten) kuosissa, jos se oli sitä ennen jatkuvasti heitellyt parisataa ppm edestakaisian harva se vuosi? Miksi vaihtelu loppui täsmälleen siihen, kun sitä ruvettiin mittaamaan?

Voisitko antaa esimerkin noista saman vuorokauden sisällä tapahtuvista CO2-pitoisuuksien muutoksista ja siitä, kuinka voimakkaita ne voivat olla?

Sivut

Uusimmat

Suosituimmat