CO2 follows temp?

[doodab]

It's gas Jim but not as we know it...

I knew there was something wrong with my bowels....

[rsingh]

I think you mean down. Negative CO2 levels would require antimatter. Now that *would* be interesting.

It's gas Jim but not as we know it...

[BlasterBates]

I think you mean down. Negative CO2 levels would require antimatter. Now that *would* be interesting.

indeed ....corrected.

[doodab]

Can CO2 levels go negative?

I think you mean down. Negative CO2 levels would require antimatter. Now that *would* be interesting.

[BlasterBates]

Can CO2 levels go down? Well it has done ...for example:

From the Mauna Loa record ...April 1971 was 327.78 and April 1970 was 328.14

But after 40 years of emissions surely this wouldn't be possible. Then again.

2008 was a cold year on the satellite, you can see here:

Latest Global Temps

Now check this out:

April 2008 386.71 compared to April 2007 386.26

That isn't much of an increase. Now it was only in one month, so the temps sharply dip, and shoot back up again, but in the dip, the CO2 nearly went down.

Now what would happen if the temp were to stay down for a while?

Lets see.

[sasguru]

Makes a good point:

No it doesn't.

HTH, but IDI.

[BlasterBates]

Makes a good point:

A study: The temperature rise has caused the CO2 Increase, not the other way around | Watts Up With That?

If you look at the CO2 record, during El Nino (warm pacific) more CO2 gets into the atmosphere than La Nina (cool pacific) hmmm

If the sea temperatures crash this and next year, which they are at the moment, could get interesting.