In short, three studies have been published, which can hardly be united
The situation is confused, the inaccuracy in many aspects of climate research still high. While the one climate researcher says that in the last 100 years the increasing CO2 emissions by the growing reception of Okosystems as a lowering to a nearly constant concentration in the atmosphere (but no problem with climate heat?), now reports other scientists that the recording capacity seems to decline. This was meant that climate heat accelerates because CO2 emissions in the atmosphere enrich.
Increase in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. Image: Nature / Corinne Le Quere et al.
According to the study trends in The Sources and Sinks of Carbon Dioxides, which appeared in Nature Geoscience, between 1959 and 2008, 43 percent of new emissions in the atmosphere remained, the rest was taken by the seas and the country.
Terrestrial sink, negative values mean CO2 recording. Image: Nature / Corinne Le Quere et al.
However, the proportion of CO2 emissions left in the atmosphere has increased slightly from about 40 to 45 percent for 50 years, which just suggest that the recording capacity of the OKOSystems may be due to the consequences of climate heat (on the way in the catastrophe). However, they point out that it was very difficult to accurately capture the recording capacity of the marine and landschains.
CO2 recording through the seas. Image: Nature / Corinne Le Quere et al.
While the team is about Corinne Le Cruere, which drops the recording capacity of the sea and the country, another scientific team from Columbia University concludes that the function of the seas have been back as CO2 lowering for years, while at the country is about the same be remained. Although the seas had recorded a record volume of 2.3 billion tonnes of CO2 last year, but since 1990, the recording capacity has been backed by 10 percent in view of the rising emissions. The kol is because the seas are warm and more acidic, which can record less CO2. Overall, the seas had received 150 billion tons of people caused CO2 emissions, which is one third more than in the 90s.
Development of anthropogenic CO2 sources and lower. Image: Nature / Samar Khatiwala et al.
However, the recording capacity according to the study Reconstruction of the History of Anthropogenic CO2 Concentrations in The Ocean, which has appeared in Nature and the emissions caused by people reconstructed for 1765 year for year and data on the temperature and CO2, oxygen, salt as well as phosphate concentrations of the seas have evaluated, not absolutely fallen, but remained the same, which bribes that the sinking recording capacity of the seas could still be compensated by the rising of the terrestrial biosphare. Here, an effect of climate warming could also be struck by, as it is assumed that warm and high CO2 concentrations allow the plants to grow stronger. Now the country takes 1.1 billion tons or more than it takes off. 40 percent of CO2 emissions recorded by the seas are stored by the sea for the Antarctic.
The calculations on the CO2 intake of terrestrial biosystems is based on a higher uncertainty as it was derived only indirectly. Until 1940, however, the terrestrial biosphere had been a source of anthropogenic CO2 emissions and only then became a CO2 sink. The recording capacity of the seas had risen massively in the 1950s, but now have been back since 2000. However, the scientists have not considered the influence of themselves be taken into account and are also assumed by a constant biomass in the seas.
Such different results confuse the laymen and let the stackato of the warnings prior to possible catastrophes, the conviction dwindle that the climate warming is threatening and now had to be traded. COLUMBIA University has therefore given the Counciler The Psychology of Climate Change Communication on the way for safety’s sake in the case of the scientists in order to illustrate their results so that they do not force climate reliability. The adviser is also intended for journalists, politicians and the interested openness to "correct", So climatic theory correctly, communicate.
Must, so it is called to represent scientific results so that they meet the concrete experience of people. To avoid too many emotional messages, for example, catastrophic information, because people only tolerate a limited amount of negative information and then make it tight. And an important point is also to turn to the uncertainties that are immanent for the prediction of climate change because they depend on a large number of links and also depending on a variety of interlocking variables. If one did not respond this point, the impression that the scientists themselves are confused, especially since the broad publicity of certain terms, for example information on probability, interpreted differently than scientists. A possibility of warranted, for example, to the broad scientific consensus that the sea level will rise, but not to confuse laymen with the discussion about the scatzed millimeters. However, one should assume that hardly sotteen climate careers alone will already understand the publication of such a communications advisor as an indication of the note of the climate researchers.