Thank you!
If you know that A is significantly less than 1/10 of B, and A + B add up to C, does it really matter for figuring out C (approximately) if A is 1%, 2%, or even 5% of B?
And, as far as the question of where man-made CO2 goes... most of it joins the biological carbon cycle. But, even when every CO2 molecule emitted in a given year is absorbed by the biological carbon cycle, the atmospheric CO2 levels are higher than they would have been without that contribution (by a significant fraction of whatever amount was emitted), because... in essence, the biological carbon cycle is just recycling.
I've used an analogy to a fountain in the past. Imagine a re-circulating fountain. You're running a hose into it from an outside faucet. Does it really matter where in the fountain, *exactly*, the water you added ends up, for figuring out if the water level in the main basin of the fountain is going to rise?
Does'nt matter because all non solids that rise into the upper atmosphere separate into nothingness by natures chemicals to protect earth. Mike
So it might be less than 2% of human emissions rather than less than 1%? Interesting, but not that significant.
Why do you even care? You don't think CO2 even matters. Aren't you always telling us it has a logarithmic effect and there is no water vapor feedback?
EDIT: You say "...of course it matters" then don't make any argument for how it does. We know that anthropogenic emissions are responsible for the increases we've seen. It's like you keep unlearning things that you already knew. It will never be volcanoes that have caused the increase.
You're not honest, even to yourself. You're just trying to find reasons to ignore the problem--it doesn't matter to you whether things are realistic or not, you just toss them out there.
First, it's good to keep in mind that fossil fuel use adds in the neighborhood of 20-30 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere every year.
With that in mind, if it's determined that volcanoes add 100-200-600 million tons of CO2 to the atmosphere every year, that amount is less than a rounding error in the amount of CO2 that's added by fossil fuel use.
Now, is a fossil fuel use rounding error, equal to all of the CO2 emissions by volcanoes, really deserving of a question, or any honestly serious consideration?
I think not.
(When asked if he wanted tea, Descartes said, "I think not". And disappeared.)
So? Still a lot less than humans.
Well according to this article we don't really know yet
http://www.livescience.com/40451-volcanic-co2-levels-are-staggering.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Livesciencecom+%28LiveScience.com+Science+Headline+Feed%29
