Anthropogenic activities are increasing the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere. There is mounting experimental evidence that lifetime exposur
Carbon dioxide overload, detected in human blood, suggests a potentially toxic atmosphere within 50 years - Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11869-026-01918-5
36 Comments
mesamunefire@piefed.social · 35 pts · 157d
You can see the change here:
more general info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_the_atmosphere_of_Earth
Kjell@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 157d
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 · 6 pts · 156d
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
Ice@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 157d
fristislurper@piefed.social · 6 pts · 157d
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 · 1 pts · 156d
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).
mesamunefire@piefed.social · 4 pts · 157d
This graph is from wikipedia. Feel free to fix it.
Lemming6969@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 157d
Isn't this the opposite of truncated? They drill down each year's cycle and show like 80 years of cycles.
hikaru755@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 157d
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 · 27 pts · 157d
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.
Wataba@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 157d
Oh god, we dont need Orphan 55 to become a canonical event.
chunes@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 157d
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 · 17 pts · 157d
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
ButteryMonkey@piefed.social · 4 pts · 157d
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 · 3 pts · 157d
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.
BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 156d
What do you even do about CO2 in that scenario. I can monitor it and collect data, but addressing it feels like a losing battle, especially in winter.
cynar@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 156d
My plan is to replace the bathroom extractor with a heat exchanger. It takes outside air, warms it using the exhaust air, then dumps it into the bedrooms.
The living areas are easier. Opening a window for 10 minutes isn't an issue when you're awake and moving about.
You can also get vent replacement versions. They flip flop between venting out, and pulling in, storing heat in a heatsink as appropriate.
SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 156d
Get some more house plants?
MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 157d
One reason the window directly over my head in bed stays open all Winter.
cynar@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 157d
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.
MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 156d
I love the cold and the bedroom is off circuit.
DarthPub@retrofed.com · 8 pts · 157d
iamtherealwalrus@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 157d
Not for your kids.
frongt@lemmy.zip · 16 pts · 157d
Y'all are having kids?
Jack@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 157d
Tonnes of CO2e, averages:
Chart, Wynes et al. 2017 PDF
quick_snail@feddit.nl · 3 pts · 156d
Use condoms
MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 157d
My GF's daughter is trying to get pregnant. It's very difficult for me not to scream "No!" I wish a grim future weren't true, but, it most certainly is going to continue to get worse. In short order, it will be exponentially noticeable.
quick_snail@feddit.nl · 4 pts · 156d
Ironic that the climate change deniers were usually the ones that claimed (falsely) that wearing masks caused this
RalfWausE@feddit.org · 4 pts · 157d
RumorsOfLove@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -38 pts · 157d
It's impossible to test, so we substituted Carbon Dioxide for other elements at random and made some meaningless calculations. 'Science'
NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world · 31 pts · 157d
Just because you don't understand it doesn't make it wrong.
benignintervention@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 157d
The paper is pretty clear about the chemistry and why they measured what.
RumorsOfLove@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -38 pts · 157d
The tagline is bullshit. When I see bullshit, I shouldn't even open the article.
Whostosay@sh.itjust.works · 17 pts · 157d
You put science in air quotes and didn't bother to look at the 'science'
This couldn't be more on brand
wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz · 5 pts · 156d
They called the abstract a 'tagline'
RumorsOfLove@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 0 pts · 154d
'the attention grabber'
i had high blood pressure. i only managed to understand the following.
CARBON DIOXIDE OVERLOAD TOXIC ATMOS FEAR IN 50 YEARS-
50 years from now is uncharted territory. Chemistry has limited prediction power.
wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 154d
That's not what an abstract is.
And just because you failed to understand something doesn't represent an inadequacy on the article's part.
It's quite demonstrable that atmospheric CO2 levels have been increasing over the decades, and that the increase is accelerating rather than slowing down.
Data that concrete can easily be extrapolated. "If we continue polluting at the current rate, the air will be unbreathable in X amount of years" is not a wild claim.
And changes in blood chemistry that are correlated with atmospheric CO2 level increases are a valid means of studying how much pollution humanity can tolerate before it has catastrophic effects.
RumorsOfLove@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 154d
luthis@lemmy.nz · 5 pts · 157d
It's not 'at random.'
nodiratime@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 156d
Aw, did someone get their fe-fees hurt?