Where is the Co2 ?

[Bill Angel]

d

 

Sorry if this is a stupid question but it's outside my field and just something I was curious about...

 

As we burn fossil fuel we release Co2 "into the atmosphere"

So my question is - does this Co2 collect in a band around the planet at a particular altitude

or is it dispersed at all levels throughout the atmosphere?

 

 

 

 

[John Cuthber]

And, once again...

But you seem to have missed the point about slow (the time-scale over which the atmosphere has formed) and fast (the time scale over which a room fills with gas).

A well might contain excess CO2, but it's not there because it "fell in" from the rest of the atmosphere; it's there because it was produced there by bacterial action.

So there's no disagreement with the document.

I disagree with you that it has any relevance to the OP.

Feel free to explain the link between the location of CO2 from fossil fuels, and CO2 generated in wells and taking time to diffuse out.

 

"There is experiment, that probably anybody who has access to dry ice, tried at least once in life.

Paper boats, balloons or bubbles, floating in empty aquarium."

Yep,

But why do you think you need the dry ice?

According to your idea, all I need to do is leave the tank open and CO2 will build up in it by stratifying out of the air.

 

The rest of us know that , since we can take a bath without asphyxiating, that simply doesn't happen

 

 

 

Or, you could stop digging.

Edited February 2, 2016 by John Cuthber

[studiot]

 

According to your idea, all I need to do is leave the tank open and CO2 will build up in it by stratifying out of the air.

 

I said no such thing.

 

 

 

Here is a quote from a GCSE (junior high school) revision site.

 

Note they divide the part of the atmosphere you refer to into four layers.

Stratification is still a rose by any other name.

Note also that although they don't large discuss variation of composition with altitude their diagram clearly indicates that it varies since they show a water ceiling and a natural ozone layer.

 

 

 

 

The atmosphere

Layers in the atmosphere

The atmosphere is the layer of gas around the Earth.

The atmosphere can be divided into four parts:

Troposphere: Where we live.

Stratosphere: Some jet aircraft.

Mesosphere: Space shuttle orbits within.

Ionosphere: Mainly charged particles.

Edited February 2, 2016 by studiot

[swansont]

 

I said no such thing.

 

 

 

Here is a quote from a GCSE (junior high school) revision site.

 

Note they divide the part of the atmosphere you refer to into four layers.

Stratification is still a rose by any other name.

Note also that although they don't large discuss variation of composition with altitude their diagram clearly indicates that it varies since they show a water ceiling and a natural ozone layer.

 

 

 

 

The atmosphere

Layers in the atmosphere

The atmosphere is the layer of gas around the Earth.

The atmosphere can be divided into four parts:

Troposphere: Where we live.

Stratosphere: Some jet aircraft.

Mesosphere: Space shuttle orbits within.

Ionosphere: Mainly charged particles.

 

The link you provided earlier showed essentially no evidence of stratification below 100 km or so. Compositions are flat. Here you are giving a drawing representing the atmosphere as extending to 80 km.

 

The OP's question was "does this Co2 collect in a band around the planet at a particular altitude or is it dispersed at all levels throughout the atmosphere?", to which the answer is "it's dispersed". All you are doing here is picking at a couple of nits. Several posts say any effect is so small it can be ignored at the level of inquiry, and you are focusing on these small and/or transient effects, as if they somehow invalidated the big picture. They don't.

 

You have said several things that are no doubt correct but at the same time are completely irrelevant to answering the OP.

[John Cuthber]

"The atmosphere

Layers in the atmosphere

The atmosphere is the layer of gas around the Earth.

The atmosphere can be divided into four parts:"

Or not.

But, even if you do, all those 4 layers have essentially the same concentration of N2, O2, Ar, and CO2. (The water vapour concn is very much more variable)

And it remains the case that you were claiming the atmosphere settles into layers with the dense gases enriched at the bottom, because of gravity.

Well, if it did that to any meaningful degree we would all suffocate.

We don't; therefore it doesn't.

Why are you still digging?

[studiot]

 

Why are you still digging?

 

 

And why are you selectively ignoring or making false statements about valid statements that are made?

 

That is not only bad science it is bad for science.

[Strange]

I am happy to admit to giving you a negative vote. It is time you stopped behaving like a child.

Edited February 2, 2016 by Strange

[studiot]

I am happy to admit to giving you a negative vote. It is time you stopped behaving like a child.

 

I really think this has nothing to do with you, Strange.

 

But if you find the truth uncomfortable, fire away.

[John Cuthber]

 

And why are you selectively ignoring or making false statements about valid statements that are made?

 

That is not only bad science it is bad for science.

OK I will call you on that.

What false statement(s) have I made?

I might be guilty of a bit of hyperbole about mashed potatoes etc - but my point was still valid in that your suggested course of action was deeply flawed.

And, come to thin of it I have certainly ignored some of the things you have said- but a point by point refutation takes more time than I think it's worth.

 

Am I allowed to mention that in the PM you sent, you said that I had called another poster here a liar (strictly, you said a "lair", but I'm assuming that was a typo) even though I had already shown that wasn't the case?

 

And why are you still digging?

[Sensei]

OK I will call you on that.

What false statement(s) have I made?

 

JC, you are mixing me with Studiot..

 

Even though we have both nickname starting from "S", we're different person.

Edited February 2, 2016 by Sensei

[studiot]

 

Am I allowed to mention that in the PM you sent, you said that I had called another poster here a liar (strictly, you said a "lair", but I'm assuming that was a typo) even though I had already shown that wasn't the case?

 

Let us get this out of the way first shall we?

 

Here is the text of the last PM in my sent box sent, dated 27 January 2016.

It had nothing to do this thread or you.

 

 

Welcome back, I saw your post.

 

Look out tomorrow, I will post something then that may help.

 

Enough said?

 

As to my statements in post#31 here

 

I stated you made a false statement. Here it is

 

 

But, even if you do, all those 4 layers have essentially the same concentration of N2, O2, Ar, and CO2. (The water vapour concn is very much more variable)

 

 

This was made in response to my showing the GCSE classification into four layers where they classify the top layer as 'mainly charged particles'

Yet you are adament that this layer has the same composition as the others.

Note that the scientific and educational authorities include all the parts of the atmosphere I included and you consistentlywished to exclude.

 

I think they are right and you are wrong, hence my contention of the false statement.

 

 

Note also that although they don't large discuss variation of composition with altitude their diagram clearly indicates that it varies since they show a water ceiling and a natural ozone layer.

 

Although my quote above was dislexic in the placement of the word large (which should have been largely) it does not alter the fact that I drew attention to a known variation of composition of some lesser components of the atmosphere with height.

I have also consistently agreed that the main two components do not vary with height within this zone, which is the zone you wish to claim as 'the atmosphere'

Hence my contention about you ignoring facts.

 

Edit this section added later and meant as a separate post.

Thank you Sensei for clearing up the PM mystery +1

 

I think perherhaps it may be a language issue but saying John made a false statement doesn't necessarily mean calling him a liar in English. That would be a much stronger statement which would be totally unwarranted. I think he just got carried away, as we say.

 

I also didn't yet take the opportunity to thank you for trying to cool things early with your delightful videos, though I did give +1 at the time.

Edited February 2, 2016 by studiot

[Sensei]

I think perherhaps it may be a language issue but saying John made a false statement doesn't necessarily mean calling him a liar in English. That would be a much stronger statement which would be totally unwarranted. I think he just got carried away, as we say.

I didn't call JC liar. Not now, nor earlier.

Private message discussion.

Completely unrelated to this thread.

Private means it should be keep known only to involved people, unless both parties agreed to reveal it.

JC, has bad habit of bringing back private discussion to the main forum.

What happened to English gentlemens? Extincted?

Edited February 2, 2016 by Sensei

[studiot]

 

I didn't call JC liar. Not now, nor earlier.

Private message discussion.

Completely unrelated to this thread.

Private means it should be keep known only to involved people, unless both parties agreed to reveal it.

JC, has bad habit of bringing back private discussion to the main forum.

What happened to English gentlemens? Extincted?

 

Well I'm sorry if I drew the wrong conclusion there.

I did find who said what to whom a mystery and I hope my comments were suitably discreet.

[John Cuthber]

 

JC, you are mixing me with Studiot..

 

Even though we have both nickname starting from "S", we're different person.

Oops!

I apologise for the confusion.

 

Studiot has posted a clip that describes the atmosphere - up to about 80KM as being made from 4 layers.

And also posted a link

http://wordpress.mrreid.org/2014/08/01/the-composition-of-earths-atmosphere-with-elevation/

which shows the composition being consistent up to about 100Km.

"Up to around 100?km the composition is fairly “normal”, in that it’s what we surface-dwellers would expect: mostly molecular nitrogen (N2 rather than N) and molecular oxygen (O2) with a small amount (0.93%) of argon and traces of some other gases (carbon dioxide, neon, etc.)."

 

And I said that " all those 4 layers have essentially the same concentration of N2, O2, Ar, and CO2. (The water vapour concn is very much more variable)"

(the fact that the graphic actually shows more than 4 layers is likely to cause confusion; the troposphere, ozone layer, stratosphere and mesosphere all have pretty much the same concentrations of CO2)

And yet I'm told

"This was made in response to my showing the GCSE classification into four layers where they classify the top layer as 'mainly charged particles'

Yet you are adament that this layer has the same composition as the others."

 

Well, what I'm adamant about is that all the air they depict in those lowest 4 layers- and that's the great majority of the world's air- has pretty much the same composition.

It certainly doesn't settle out to any observable degree because of air currents and, even if those currents were somehow abolished, the "stratification" would be very small.

[Strange]

I really think this has nothing to do with you, Strange.

 

Your posts have done nothing but cause confusion to the OP. It would therefore be helpful (to everybody) if you stopped your irrelevant posts.

[studiot]

 

Studiot has posted a clip that describes the atmosphere - up to about 80KM as being made from 4 layers.

 

One last time.

 

No it doesn't.

 

Read it properly.

[Phi for All]

!

Moderator Note

OP question seems to have been answered successfully to a reasonable degree. Let's lower some BP and close this topic, since it's "one last time" time.