CO2 from 1903 book

gimlet · 30-04-2008, 07:20 AM

I was surprised to read this morning thumbing through an old text book (as you do) the following, taken from the book, Inorganic Chemistry printed 1903:

Carbon Dioxide.

Average composition of air may be taken as follows … Carbon Dioxide 0.3360 per 1000 vol.

The proportion of this gas present in the air is also liable to considerable variation, although not through such a wide range as the aqueous vapour. The processeces of respiration, combustion, and putrefaction are attended by the evolution of carbon dioxide, hence the amount of this gas present in closed inhabited places is greater than the open air; in badly ventilated and crowded rooms the proportions sometimes rises to three parts in 1000 vols. Frankland has found that at high elevations the amount of carbon dioxide in the air is often, although not invariably, considerably above the normal.

At Chamounix (3000 feet) the amount of carbon dioxide was 0.63 per 1000 vol
Grands Mulets (11,000 feet) the amount of carbon dioxide was 1.11 per 1000 vol
Mont Blanc (15,732 feet) the amount of carbon dioxide was 0.61 per 1000 vol

So in today’s parts per 1000,000 we have:

Average co2 – 336 PPM, Chamounix 630 PPM, Grands Mulets 1111 PPM and Mont Blanc 610 PPM.

What I find interesting is firstly how high these figures are, and I recall seeing a clip some time ago, showing the measuring of CO2 levels on the top of a mountain and the point being made that on the top of a mountain, where there should be clean unpolluted air there now exists devastating high levels of CO2.
According to the book, there are higher CO2 levels during the night, in foggy weather and high CO2 on mountains because of lack of vegetation.

Poptech · 30-04-2008, 11:42 AM

Where do you get devasting levels from? Those are not even harmful.

- Carbon Dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere have risen from 280 to 370 ppm over the past 100 years (IPCC)
- Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is not toxic until 5% (50,000ppm) concentration (Source)
- Any detrimental effects of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) including chronic exposure to 3% (30,000ppm) are reversible (Source)
- OSHA, NIOSH, and ACGIH occupational exposure standards are 0.5% (5,000 ppm) Carbon Dioxide (CO2) (Source)

You don't even feel drowsy until 10,000ppm.

g hall · 30-04-2008, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poptech

You don't even feel drowsy until 10,000ppm.

Some, and I cannot imagine who, are dozier on lower levels

gimlet · 30-04-2008, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poptech

Where do you get devasting levels from? Those are not even harmful.

- Carbon Dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere have risen from 280 to 370 ppm over the past 100 years (IPCC)
- Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is not toxic until 5% (50,000ppm) concentration (Source)
- Any detrimental effects of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) including chronic exposure to 3% (30,000ppm) are reversible (Source)
- OSHA, NIOSH, and ACGIH occupational exposure standards are 0.5% (5,000 ppm) Carbon Dioxide (CO2) (Source)

You don't even feel drowsy until 10,000ppm.

Poptech

Sorry I was not clear in my posting. The point I was hoping to make and failed, was to point out that in a book over 100 years old the CO2 levels described were higher than they are now reported to be for the same period. I was trying to be sarcastic (again failed) by pointing out the readings on the tops of mountains over 100 years ago was sometimes very high, so nothing new- 1110 ppm CO2, will I know get some posters very excited.

Eurosceptic Atlanticist · 30-04-2008, 01:27 PM

Yes but how much difference in accuracy is there between instruments from 1903 and 2008? Quite a lot I'd imagine.

mkpdavies · 30-04-2008, 03:30 PM

Not for measuring co2 levels. It isn't a complicated thing to do. It's like saying a spoon from that age is less worthy of a spoon now.

Poptech · 01-05-2008, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimlet

Poptech

Sorry I was not clear in my posting. The point I was hoping to make and failed, was to point out that in a book over 100 years old the CO2 levels described were higher than they are now reported to be for the same period. I was trying to be sarcastic (again failed) by pointing out the readings on the tops of mountains over 100 years ago was sometimes very high, so nothing new- 1110 ppm CO2, will I know get some posters very excited.

Ah that makes sense.

Eurosceptic Atlanticist · 01-05-2008, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

Not for measuring co2 levels. It isn't a complicated thing to do. It's like saying a spoon from that age is less worthy of a spoon now.

Thanks for clearing it up. I honestly didn't have a clue.

mkpdavies · 01-05-2008, 07:13 AM

Now getting a picture of GLOBAL levels is a bit more complex!

Ian C · 01-05-2008, 07:56 AM

Quote:

The point I was hoping to make and failed, was to point out that in a book over 100 years old the CO2 levels described were higher than they are now reported to be for the same period. I was trying to be sarcastic (again failed) by pointing out the readings on the tops of mountains over 100 years..

No - the silent majority noted your points. Some of us did wonder though if readings on the tops of mountains was a tall story.

30-04-2008, 07:20 AM	#1 (permalink)
gimlet Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Shropshire Posts: 762	CO2 from 1903 book I was surprised to read this morning thumbing through an old text book (as you do) the following, taken from the book, Inorganic Chemistry printed 1903: Carbon Dioxide. Average composition of air may be taken as follows … Carbon Dioxide 0.3360 per 1000 vol. The proportion of this gas present in the air is also liable to considerable variation, although not through such a wide range as the aqueous vapour. The processeces of respiration, combustion, and putrefaction are attended by the evolution of carbon dioxide, hence the amount of this gas present in closed inhabited places is greater than the open air; in badly ventilated and crowded rooms the proportions sometimes rises to three parts in 1000 vols. Frankland has found that at high elevations the amount of carbon dioxide in the air is often, although not invariably, considerably above the normal. At Chamounix (3000 feet) the amount of carbon dioxide was 0.63 per 1000 vol Grands Mulets (11,000 feet) the amount of carbon dioxide was 1.11 per 1000 vol Mont Blanc (15,732 feet) the amount of carbon dioxide was 0.61 per 1000 vol So in today’s parts per 1000,000 we have: Average co2 – 336 PPM, Chamounix 630 PPM, Grands Mulets 1111 PPM and Mont Blanc 610 PPM. What I find interesting is firstly how high these figures are, and I recall seeing a clip some time ago, showing the measuring of CO2 levels on the top of a mountain and the point being made that on the top of a mountain, where there should be clean unpolluted air there now exists devastating high levels of CO2. According to the book, there are higher CO2 levels during the night, in foggy weather and high CO2 on mountains because of lack of vegetation.

30-04-2008, 01:27 PM	#5 (permalink)
Eurosceptic Atlanticist Uber Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: The West Country Posts: 5,361 Party: Libertarian Party	Yes but how much difference in accuracy is there between instruments from 1903 and 2008? Quite a lot I'd imagine. __________________ Ubuntu User \| Get Ubuntu! \| Ubuntu Social Group \| Ubuntu Forum Firefox User \| Get Firefox! \| Firefox Social Group \| Firefox Forum NO2ID Supporter \| Join NO2ID! \| NO2ID Group \| NO2ID Forum

30-04-2008, 03:30 PM	#6 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,362	Not for measuring co2 levels. It isn't a complicated thing to do. It's like saying a spoon from that age is less worthy of a spoon now. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

01-05-2008, 07:13 AM	#9 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,362	Now getting a picture of GLOBAL levels is a bit more complex! __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

30-04-2008, 11:42 AM	#2 (permalink)
Poptech Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 124	Where do you get devasting levels from? Those are not even harmful. - Carbon Dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere have risen from 280 to 370 ppm over the past 100 years (IPCC) - Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is not toxic until 5% (50,000ppm) concentration (Source) - Any detrimental effects of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) including chronic exposure to 3% (30,000ppm) are reversible (Source) - OSHA, NIOSH, and ACGIH occupational exposure standards are 0.5% (5,000 ppm) Carbon Dioxide (CO2) (Source) You don't even feel drowsy until 10,000ppm.