Anthropogenic activities are increasing the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere. There is mounting experimental evidence that lifetime exposur

    • Kjell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      To make it even more scary, it is accelerating. It has increased 75 ppm in 30 years and it was 40 ppm in the first 30 years.

      • Karjalan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        I mean, just the fact that we increased the ppm by ~100, or 1/3rd what it was, in just 60 years is terrifying. Let alone that it’s accelerating. And CO2 isn’t even the worst climate change gas. And there are many positive feedback loops getting exacerbated by the effects…

        Good times

      • fristislurper@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        I see this sentiment quite often, is it field-specific? Cause in physics and chemistry, starting at 0 is really not required…

        In this case, the zero value is really not relevant (since no-one would ever have it anyway). It would just hide the signifcant drift over time. A good scaling here would be based on some clinically relevant interval I guess.

        • matsdis@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I agree that showing the zero level may be useful here, but… I cannot find a scientific source that shows it differently, so it’s not intentionally misleading at least. The bigger issue IMO is that it doesn’t show enough historic context (ice core data). The original article has it, or nature.org or co2science.org (though it doesn’t show the latest measurements).

      • Lemming6969@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Isn’t this the opposite of truncated? They drill down each year’s cycle and show like 80 years of cycles.

        • hikaru755@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          The y axis doesn’t start at 0, making it look like the change has been a lot more drastic than it actually was (even though it’s still very bad). I think that’s what they’re referring to

  • Greyghoster@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    This great news! Not just not have we an increasingly unstable climate causing unprecedented heatwaves, droughts, floods, snow, now we have steady increases atmospheric CO2 will cause direct health impacts and if it goes on then we will need to mutate to cope with it. That they can measure the increase in atmospheric CO2, by proxy, in the blood is pretty frightening.

  • chunes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    They do mention that CO2 levels are typically higher indoors and that Americans spend 87% of their time indoors, but it would have been interesting to see a prediction for how much sooner this would become a problem inside.

    • cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Modern houses are actually quite a problem for this. A well insulated house also tend to be quite well sealed. I’ve seen my bedroom pass 5000ppm. I suspect a lot of people are working in 1000ppm environments or higher for long periods.

      For those interested, IKEA recently released a air quality sensor that does CO2 for a very low price. ALPSTUGA

        • cynar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t want it too cold when sleeping, and heating a room with an open window is wasteful and expensive.

          I’m personally planning on installing an air to air heat exchanger. Even a cheap one can get 75% recovery. Add in some air sensors to make it smart and it’s fairly fire and forget.

      • ButteryMonkey@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        The apartment I used to live in was so good for this ventilation thing, even with all the windows closed. The air conditioner was installed permanently in the wall and had a gap around it that let enough wind through to rattle my vertical blinds across the room. Never had to worry about high co2 during those trapped-inside Midwest winters! :p

        Joking aside, I covered that thing with plastic and layers of blankets. Current house isn’t much better in that regard, the air leaks are just from everywhere, because it’s ancient. Costs a fortune to heat, so I keep it cold all winter. But at least I don’t have too much to worry about with co2 buildup.

        • cynar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          I feel you. I lived in a converted stable once. The place leaked air like a sieve.

          I also discovered the oil fired boiler had 20m+ of unlagged pipes between it and our radiators, running through an unused stable. It took 2 full tanks/winter to just keep it above freezing. It should have been 1/2 a tank to keep it nice and warm.

  • DarthPub@retrofed.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    Shit…well at 45 I’ll be dead 15-20 years before it hits the fan. I guess that’s a personal win.

  • quick_snail@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Ironic that the climate change deniers were usually the ones that claimed (falsely) that wearing masks caused this