They are not the only people on holiday

The general opinion is that 70C / 75C is enough to kill the virus; which is more than your usual washing machine will give you.
As posted before, Tumble dryers on hot do the job.

This thread is for people asking scientist questions. As you don't have a question - what is your scientific specialty ?

The answer seems to be here, basically we could need to have a year of this for it to show up in observatories.

Thank you, Castro.

Yes, Pashosh, I saw that trend. Precisely because it is depicted from 2016 onwards, the graphs span too great a time to look at the detailed numbers, such as are listed (at the link above) specifically for the 6 days of 6th to 10th April. I'd like to see the numbers, in that kind of detail, for the past year or more. Could you see them anywhere? It's be interesting to follow those into Summer 2020.

Thanks Castro.

However - there is no explanation why we need to wait a year. The same source says that there was a global drop of 6% a month ago. probably much more since then. air quality improved drastically - yet CO2 is still the highest it's ever been.

It would be good to see the model Prof. Keeling is using to make his predication.

@Doropfiz: click on the Data or Recent Trend tabs to get the info you need.

It looks like an issue of precision of measurement. Or a difference that's big enough in absolute terms to be measurable, to present it that way round.

The total difference created by a drop of 10% takes a full year to be big enough, in absolute terms, to show in measurements. Conversely if fossil fuel consumption dropped by 100% for 1/10 of a year the reductioin in absolute terms would be the same as 10% over a full year, thus a 100% drop should take a bit more than a month to be measurable and actually show in measurements.

The measurment is very accurate, it should pick up a 6% drop. If it can't - it shouldn't pick up a 1% increase either.

I am trying and failing to follow your logic.
Improvement in air quality since the lock-downs is being reported world wide and is very visible in many cities. The poor quality of city air is mainly due to other factors than CO2 levels.
As others have stated, CO2 measurements in the middle of the pacific are not sufficiently responsive to man made CO2 to pick up the effect of the lockdowns.
As for speciality: a PhD in biochemistry and a lifetimes experience in research and development. Yours?

The current common wisdom is that the increase in CO2 in Earth's atmosphere is due due to man made activity - burning fossile fuel for transport,energy, industry etc.

Covid reduced this activity drastically.

Logically this should show up in measurements, yet the measurements show an increase in CO2.

The explanation Kiwisteve offers - is that even the best equipment used by good scientists can't notice the difference. in this case - it shouldn't pick the difference in the other direction either.

Another suggestion is that there is a gap of months between the actual reduction and the differenet measurement. What is causing the gap ?

Maybe there is an increase in other sources of CO2 ? maybe there is decrease in CO2 absorbants ? maybe the current theory needs to be updated ?

Anybody on the forum with actual scientific background in climatology ?

__________________
"I work abroad, you've gone native, he's an expat"

Did you expect a decrease in CO2? That the PPM numbers would drop?

Yes

Would it make any difference to you ? Whatever you are a specialist in, it is not logical thinking.

I'm not a climatologist, but I do know that scientific argument isn't won by insults.

If Human activity is the cause of CO2 increase than less human activity should result in less CO2 in the atmosphere, right ?

Why do you expect the athmospheric(!) CO2 level to drop? I honestly don't follow.

The amount of CO2 added to the athmosphere by humn activity is less now than a year ago. Only 90% of last year's amount or whatever, but that's still a huge amount of CO2 that's blown into and added to the athmosphere every day.
Nope.
The amount added is smaller, we seem to agree on that. But by adding to what's already there you/we still keep increasing the resulting amount.

A + x is always more than A (as long as A and x are bigger than zero, which is the case here).

I downloaded the txt file with all Mauna Loa data dating to 1958 from the NOAA site.

Since 1970, there have been very small dips in the average CO2 ppm between June/July and Sept/Oct (depending on year). However, after October each year the numbers continue to rise and don't go back to previous lows. There are no dips in any other months.

I think Urs Max is right, overall we have an A + x trend.

Perhaps we should expect a decrease in the ppm sooner this year (May?) since most of the world is shut down, but even looking at the past week the number has risen by 0.01 ppm each day.

Also it appears human CO2 emissions are only part of the atmospheric CO2 numbers.

https://www.climate.gov/news-feature...carbon-dioxide

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/fe...ycle/page5.php

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/s...-not-for-long/

Your second attempt is interesting:

If A was the level of CO2 in 2019, and x is the added CO2 in 2020 then
follows that the level of CO2 will always increase as long as fossil fuels are used. We are doomed even if there will be internal combustion engine left running.

Luckily there are are CO2 sinks which absorb CO2 and save us.

At the very least we should see CO2 growth rate slow significantly.

Yes. A will increase less fast from 2019 to 2020 than it would have without the coronavirus but increase it will. Everything else being equal of course.

Comments?
Apparent evidence for Hawking points in the Cosmic Microwave Background Sky

It’s all Klingon to me?