Global Warming is so little hot air…..

I’m so sick and tired of lawyers and politicians (and a guy in India who plays with choo-choos) telling me that I am ignorant for not “believing” in Manmade Global Warming.

I spent less than an HOUR on the Internet, used basic math skills taught me in high school, and was able to figure out “how much” man is affecting the atmosphere.  Not much, is what the numbers told me (of course, simple logic had already told me that…..).

The lawyers and the politicians and the pseudo-scientists – who all care more about which parties they are going to be invited to and how large their vacation homes will be – really hope that more people won’t figure this out.


The International Energy Agency states that the amount of energy-related (man-made) CO2 emissions in 2010 climbed to a record of 30.6 Billion tons/year (1 Gigaton = 1 billion tons).

According to the Universal Industrial Gases, Inc. conversion table, 1 ton of CO2 = 458.8 m3

So, if we want to convert CO2 emissions from tons to km3, we would do the following:

30.6 Billion tons CO2/yr X 458.8 m3/tons = 14,039 Billion m3 CO2/yr in emissions (using the IEA’s own numbers).


Now, if you are talking about volume in terms of the atmosphere, you have to use the units that are used when dealing with large bodies like the Earth, so you will need to convert the number above into the same units used (km3) when talking about the atmosphere.

Since 1 km3 = 1 Billion m3,

14,039 Billion m3 CO2/yr X (1 km3/1Billion m3) = 14,039 km3 CO2/yr.  in energy-related (man-made) emissions, according to the IEA’s numbers.

(The International Energy Agency is warning about an additional increase of 1.9% in energy-related CO2 emissions every year causing catastrophic global warming. 

14,039 km3 CO2/yr X 0.019 = 266.741 km3 CO2/yr

Really? They want us to be concerned about an additional increase of a mere 267 km3/yr?)


Now we’re going to calculate some volumes (V = (4/3) × pi × r3).

The radius of the Earth is 6371 km, which makes the volume of the Earth 1,083,206,916,845 km3.

The troposphere, which is the lowest level of the Earth’s atmosphere (and where most of what we consider “weather” occurs), begins at the surface and extends to between 9 km at the poles and 17 km at the equator.

If we take the lowest “height” of the atmosphere (9km), the minimum total radius of the Earth + troposphere would be 6380 km, which would give a MINIMUM total volume of 1,087,803,985,035 km3.

The difference between those two numbers is the minimum volume of the tropospheric atmosphere:  

1,087,803,985,035 km3 – 1,083,206,916,845 km3 = 4,597,068,190 km3 of atmosphere

(Bear in mind that the troposphere is only the first layer of what can be classified as the Earth’s total atmosphere, and gasses disperse throughout the entire atmosphere.)

(Using an average tropospheric height of 13km [radius of 6384 km], the total volume jumps to 1,089,851,294,382 km3, which would make the average volume of the tropospheric atmosphere 6,644,377,537 km3)  


Now, I know I’m not supposed to use Wikipedia for research purposes, but this next part is well-cited:

Air is the name given to atmosphere used in breathing and photosynthesis. Dry air contains roughly (by volume) 78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.039% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases. Air also contains a variable amount of water vapor, on average around 1%. While air content and atmospheric pressure varies at different layers, air suitable for the survival of terrestrial plants and terrestrial animals is currently only known to be found in Earth’s troposphere and artificial atmospheres.

If I’m reading that right, then the minimum volume of CO2 currently required to sustain life as we know it in our air/atmosphere is:

4,597,068,190 km3 of atmosphere X .00039 = 1,792,856 km3 of CO2

If “man” adds 14,039 km3 to the atmosphere in a year, that number would climb to 1,806,895 km3 of CO2 in the atmosphere.  You know what the percentage of CO2 is after that increase?

1,806,895 km3 of CO2 /4,607,168,459 km3 of atmosphere = .0003930 = .0393%

Yep, each year, man-made emissions contribute an additional  whopping .0003% in atmospheric volume – the MINIMUM calculated tropospheric volume.


Because of this infinitesimal, insignificant amount of change, the entire planet is somehow going to burn up?

On this infinitesimal, insignificant amount of change politicians want to levy a tax on the population of the world?

They honestly expect us to worry about an increase in man-made emissions of 267 km3 of CO2 per year? In an atmosphere of over 4,500,000,000 km3?


Where did these “experts” go to school?

About Teresa in Fort Worth, TX

A short, fat, over-the-hill, happily-married mother of 4 daughters. I know just enough to get myself in trouble....
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Global Warming is so little hot air…..

  1. TGSG says:

    I think they went to school at Greenpeace U.


  2. jam2 says:

    you are obviously confused AND in a state of denial…..
    global temperature fluctuations has nothing…i say….NOTHING to do with that big yellow thing in the sky!!!!!

    (hope all’s well :))
    btw i think you dropped a sig fig…


  3. BackwardsBoy says:

    Good work, Teresa. It doesn’t take much to debunk all this stuff, I did it with observation and some common sense.


  4. Doug says:

    Teresa, Let’s see. We should trust a blogger with great math skills who spends one hour on the internet over mankind’s generally accepted body of scientific knowledge. Yeah, that makes sense.


    • Hard to tell if this is sarcasm (if so, thanks!) or not, but when I was in school, the “generally accepted” practice in any scientific body said that a theory had to be reproducible, AND if even one person could show that the reasoning was flawed, then the entire theory had to be thrown out as unproven.

      These so-called “experts” surrounded themselves with yes-men and wouldn’t release their data to anyone – including other scientists – to try and reproduce their results. That in and of itself rendered their theories null and void.

      Once the data WAS released, the genie was out of the bottle. Other scientific experts – with more alphabet soup behind their names than I could ever hope to have – blew holes in every theory put forward to the point that the entire Global Warming enterprise should have sunk beneath the weight of the failed careers of those who were trying to cash in on the fraud.

      The fact that these charlatans are still walking around in broad daylight, rather than slinking off into a hole somewhere, says more about the “Flat Earth”/”Geocentric” nature of the herd mentality than anything else. You tell people something enough times, they come to believe that it’s true – even when the data shows that it clearly isn’t.

      Galileo was right about the Sun.

      Michael Mann is wrong about global warming.


Leave a Reply (Please be nice - my mom reads my blog!)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s