Amount of CO2 exhaled contributing to climate change???

• March 22nd, 2007, 01:13 PM
Dave91
Amount of CO2 exhaled contributing to climate change???
Just been doing some maths, and I reckon people on the planet exhale somewhere in the realm of 1,401,600,000 tonnes per year of carbon dioxide per year. Here's how I came to that figure:

0.037 g exhaled per breath

12 breaths/min

0.037 x 12 x 60 =
26.6 g/hour/person

Presuming there are 6,000,000,000 people this means there is:

160000000000g per hour

=160000000 kg per hour

=160000 tonnes per hour

160000 x 24 x 365 =

1,401,600,000 tonnes per year

Have I gone horribly wrong? To what extent does the CO2 we exhale contribute to climate change? If this is right, we are exhaling 58 times as much CO2 as we are generating through other man-made means. Am I missing something?

Dave
• March 22nd, 2007, 01:32 PM
That's about the same as 1 million average cars, there are probably at least a billion cars in the world.

But don't worry CO2 is not the primary cause of Global warming, infact it's not even in the top 10...
• March 29th, 2007, 07:06 AM
Jellybird
But we've always been breathing out CO2 so why is it making a difference now?
• March 30th, 2007, 07:49 AM
Dave91
Presuming it is making a difference, it would be having an effect now because the amount of people on the planet is higher than it ever has been before. The population has absolutely shot up in the last century.

Dave
• March 30th, 2007, 09:50 AM
Jellyologist
The amount is zilch in the scheme of things. Like a mosquito playing chicken with your windshield.

It's a good indication, however, how 'big' numbers are suppose to be meaningful when they often aren't. We hear in the media about tons of this and tons of that. All meaningless without some perspective and relevant comparision. They 'may' be meaningful but why?

I was at a conference once and a speaker purposely left a power of 10 off a figure out of an equation and thus reduced the whole size of the universe by 10 times. No one at the conference of scientists noticed. His purpose, as pointed out later, was to warn against reading too much into numbers as humans can't relate to large numbers outside of our immediate experience.

The same with percentages without perspective. 'Murders are up 100% in the last year'. Well, if it's a big city and there was one murder the previous year and two the next that's 100% increase. If it had 100 murders the previous year and 95 the next, that's a 5% reduction. Want to live in a city with murder rates 'soaring' 100% a year or being reduced 5% ?
• March 30th, 2007, 03:03 PM
Dave91
Just out of curiosity, could someone please provide figures as to how much carbon dioxide is being emitted in total? The only figures I can find are on Wikipedia, and if they are right, which knowing Wikipedia they almost certainly aren't, my figure puts carbon dioxide emissions from human exhalation somewhere between Russia and India.

Dave
• March 30th, 2007, 03:06 PM
Nevyn
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave91
Just out of curiosity, could someone please provide figures as to how much carbon dioxide is being emitted in total? The only figures I can find are on Wikipedia, and if they are right, which knowing Wikipedia they almost certainly aren't, my figure puts carbon dioxide emissions from human exhalation somewhere between Russia and India.

Dave

I don't get it :? , how can i figure be between two countries?
• March 31st, 2007, 12:01 PM
Dave91
It would put my figure for emissions from exhaling between the man-made emissions of Russia and India.

Dave
• April 1st, 2007, 08:18 AM
Cat1981(England)
No, it doesn't add anything that wasn't there before. All that CO2 is already inside our eco-system. I think the figure for mans co2 emissions is about 7/8 billion tons per year, im not sure if that includes breathing.
• April 4th, 2007, 12:06 PM
Everlasting
Co2 Emissions
Just for the record:

The evidence states that due to the destruction of the ozone
layer, increased Co2 is escaping, and the sun is producing greater
heat; causing the global climate change.:

SPACE.com -- Global Warming on Pluto Puzzles ScientistsPluto's
atmospheric pressure has tripled over the past 14 years,
indicating a stark temperature rise, the researchers said.

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming,
Scientist SaysSimultaneous warming on Earth and Mars
suggests that our planet's recent ... that the current
global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun.

Sun Responsible for Global WarmingTwo new reports cast
to another cause for the recent warming of Earth changes in the sun.

Cause for Global Warming/Hole in Ozone LayerIncreasing
the amount of C02 in the atmosphere will increase the amount
of reflected energy capture and lead to a temperature increase.

Other planets are being affected by the earth's global warming, and
this event could be attributed to other anomolies in space.

Everlasting

Futuristic Science Fiction Novel
Moon Over Key Biscayne
booksandmore.4t.com
• April 4th, 2007, 12:19 PM
Would you like to add some links to these articles? - I'm sure they will be avidly read...
• April 5th, 2007, 07:08 PM
Cat1981(England)
No, what those people have not told you is that Mars is now cooler than it was in the 70's when measurements were made with the viking landers, even though the temperature on earth has gone up in the same time. Temp rises on mars have only been seen over the last 3 years in the southern hemisphere. As for pluto, the temps probable have gone up (although i have no idea how they made the measurements) but it has to be taken into account that pluto has very eccentric orbit around the sun.

Quote:

The evidence states that due to the destruction of the ozone
layer, increased Co2 is escaping
I'm not sure what this is about, if you wouldn't mind rephrasing it, it would be greatly appreciated.
• April 7th, 2007, 08:45 PM
M
Huh?? Am I missing something here? Since when does human breathing increase the CO2 content of air? We exhale what we inhale. At least that's what I do. I don't know about you guys. :-D
• April 8th, 2007, 02:43 AM
Dave91
Correct, but in the case of CO2, we exhale far more than we inhale. Respiration and all that.
• April 8th, 2007, 09:29 PM
zephyrus17
Nay, Dave91, you forgot about lovely trees. :)
• April 9th, 2007, 02:36 AM
Dave91
Even accounting for the fact that thanks to both the population explosion and massive deforestation there is now a far higher person-tree ratio than there ever has been before?
• April 9th, 2007, 07:55 AM
M
Quote:

Correct, but in the case of CO2, we exhale far more than we inhale. Respiration and all that.
Quantify "far more". How much CO2 emitted by human activity is due to respiration and "all that" vs. the amount taken in (and emitted) through breathing?

And how much of that CO2 (or C and O2) had not been in circulation(atmosphere, plant or animal matter) before the human emitted it?

Let's try to come up with a number of how much CO2 an average human body really "produces" as a net increase (per time) in its immediate surrounding. Multiply it by the number of humans on Earth. Then come up with a figure of how much of that increase in CO2 would not have been taken care of through natural processes by other organisms in pre-industrial times and with all forests intact. Then you have your quote for a global net increase of CO2 by human body activity.

As far as I understand, global photosynthesis and respiration used to be in a pretty stable equilibrium before we started to release CO2 by burning fossil fuels.