Oh sorry. I went to sleep before you posted. Sureโฆ Thankfully, I read the new scientist every week and love science and maths so all good :) I also read the 2014 Intergovernmental panel on climate change report (Iโm pretty sure from your question that youโre familiar) and did my own research afterwards. Here goes:
The Earth's natural systems, such as oceans and forests, can absorb some of the excess CO2, but they have limits. As we continue to emit more CO2 than these natural systems can absorb, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere keeps rising. Even though the additional CO2 has diminishing effects on the ECS (equilibrium climate sensitivity for the uninitiated) values, it still contributes to an overall warming trend. The warming may not be as rapid as it would be in the absence of logarithmic absorption, but it is still significant over time. Additionally, other greenhouse gases like methane, nitrous oxide, and water vapor also contribute to climate change. These gases have different absorption properties and can amplify the warming effect of CO2. So, while the logarithmic absorption abilities of CO2 do affect the ECS values, climate change is still possible due to CO2 emissions. The cumulative effect of increasing CO2 concentrations, along with other greenhouse gases, leads to a gradual warming of the Earth's climate. Thatโs why itโs crucial to reduce CO2 emissions and transition to cleaner energy sources to mitigate the impacts of climate change.
If you want to get a bit more mathematical about it (I admit that I learned this from one of the IPCC authors, whose name I canโt recall) when human CO2 emissions are plotted on a logarithmic scale, they appear as exponential growth, which means they are increasing at a constant percentage rate. The logarithmic scale helps us visualize this exponential growth as a straight line. However, when we plot atmospheric CO2 concentrations on the same logarithmic scale, we observe a slight upward curve over the last 30 years. This indicates that the rate of increase in atmospheric CO2 is slightly higher than what would be expected from a purely exponential growth. This upward curve suggests that the rate at which CO2 is accumulating in the atmosphere is accelerating. It means that human emissions are increasing at a rate faster than exponential growth. This is a cause for concern because it implies that the Earth's natural systems, such as oceans and forests, are not able to absorb the excess CO2 as effectively as they could in the past. As the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere continues to rise at an accelerating rate, it leads to an increased greenhouse effect and contributes to the warming of the Earth's climate. So, if human emissions keep increasing as they have, it is logical to expect that global warming will speed up too.
I hope that helps. That was actually a reasonably good question. Thanks.
Will this eventually be an X-Tweet?
there's some milage in the though that #elonmusk is a #montypython fan #x
I'd like to register a complaint...
This Tweet is dead...
...This is an X-Tweet
@IMcMillan
@BBCRadio3 Fflat Huw Puw https://t.co/oyP8LqDdUz
We used to sing this at school. The chorus had everyone shouting as loud as possible, great fun Gareth (france)