The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says the levels of the crucial heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere reached historic highs last year, growing at near-record fast paces.

The levels of the crucial heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere reached historic highs last year, growing at near-record fast paces, according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Carbon dioxide, the most important and abundant of the greenhouse gases caused by humans, rose in 2023 by the third highest amount in 65 years of record keeping, NOAA announced Friday. Scientists are also worried about the rapid rise in atmospheric levels of methane, a shorter-lived but more potent heat-trapping gas. Both jumped 5.5% over the past decade.

The 2.8 parts per million increase in carbon dioxide airborne levels from January 2023 to December, wasn’t as high as the jumps were in 2014 and 2015, but they were larger than every other year since 1959, when precise records started. Carbon dioxide’s average level for 2023 was 419.3 parts per million, up 50% from pre-industrial times.

  • SeaJ
    16•9 months ago

    No. We need to stop getting methane out of the ground and using it as an energy source. You are right that it has a lot higher warming potential but you know what would prevent that warming potential? Not having it come out of the ground in the first place! You are also right that it permeates quite easily…including on its way to being used. Methane as an energy source is leaky as fuck and is about in par with coal for warming potential due to how fucking leaky it is.

    Also, I said there should be no expansion of carbonemitting since there are cheaper and renewable alternatives. Why the fuck would we expand methane when it costs more and is more damaging. We also need to stop using our current sources of carbon emitting energy but that is a ways off.

    Carbon capture, especially by oil companies, is currently a farce and does nothing but help oil companies put out a greenwashing marketing campaign while soaking up government subsidies to do it.

    • @nexusband
      1•9 months ago

      My point was more focused on synthetic methan and leave the stuff that’s safe in the ground exactly there.

    • @disguy_ovahea
      1•9 months ago

      You’re right about discontinuing methane extraction, but not in regards to carbon capture. Landfills, for example, produce excessive quantities of methane. Many regions have succeeded in burning the emitted methane and capturing the carbon.

      Methane is 28 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. It remains in the atmosphere for a decade before breaking down into water and carbon dioxide. It’s far better to burn and capture escaping methane, even if the carbon capture isn’t perfect.

      • SeaJ
        1•9 months ago

        I’d love to read up on that. As far as I know some municipalities will use the landfill methane for energy but capturing the carbon is not done. Please share your source.

        I do agree for landfills that it is better to capture that methane and make use of. But that is such a small portion of natural gas use that it is a rounding error. And the problem with us using LNG and gaseous methane is that it leaks like a mother fucker. It is marketed as a greener alternative compared with coal. Unfortunately because there is so much leakage, it is basically a wash when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions.

        We could also cut landfill methane emissions by composting food waste and not having it in the landfill. Less methane produced, less to burn off, and less to leak out into the atmosphere.