Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part III: Induced Stupidity and the Decline of the West

There is no known physiological reason why doubling, tripling or raising by a factor of ten the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide would significantly affect human physical or mental performance. Humans in submarines, aircraft, and office buildings survive and appear to function normally in atmospheres containing many times the present atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration (1). Only at concentration above 10,000 parts per million do effects on performance become obvious, and suffocation due to carbon dioxide occurs only at concentrations many times higher still.

Ambient carbon dioxide concentration and cognitive capacity. Image source: Satish et al..

But two recent papers from top research labs show that, contrary to expectation, rather small increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration sharply impair some vitally important cognitive capacities.(2,3) In both studies, experimental subjects were tested on various types of cognitive tasks ranging from mundane busy work to the exercise of initiative, and strategic thinking. What they found was that over a range of carbon dioxide concentrations commonly occurring in air-conditioned school and office buildings, performance on tasks requiring higher cognitive functions were significantly or catastrophically reduced at the higher carbon dioxide concentrations, whereas performance on more mundane tasks was largely unaffected.

These papers, which deserve reading in their entirety by anyone with a serious interest in human intellectual performance in general or in their own performance or that of their subordinates or employees, remind one of the theory that Rome collapsed because of lead in the water due to the extensive use by the Romans of lead-pipe plumbing. Could it be that we in the West are Hell bent for collapse for a similarly mundane reason, in our case the cause being carbon dioxide in the air supply of the air-conditioned buildings in which most decision-makers and professionals now work?

The more one thinks about it the more Donald Trump's insistence that "We are led by very, very stupid people" seems credible. This sad state of affairs could simply be the result of a combination of the carbon dioxide dome over Washington DC, plus inadequate ventilation of the Oval Office and the Capitol.

(1) Vercruyssen, Max, et al. 2007. Effects of Carbon Dioxide Inhalation on Psychomotor and Mental Performance During Exercise and Recovery. Intl. J. Occup. Safety & Ergonomics. 13:15–27.

(2) Satish, Usha, et al. 2012. Is CO2 an Indoor Pollutant? Direct Effects of Low-to-Moderate CO2 Concentrations on Human Decision-Making Performance. Env. Health Perspect. 120:1671–1677.

(3) Allen, Joseph G. et al. 2015. Associations of Cognitive Function Scores with Carbon Dioxide, Ventilation, and Volatile Organic Compound Exposures in Office Workers: A Controlled Exposure Study of Green and Conventional Office Environments. Environ. Health Perspect. Adv. Publication.

Related: 

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part IV: Reversing the Trend

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part II: Ecosystem Disruption

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part I: Carbon Dioxide Is Not a Greenhouse Gas

Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part IV: Reversing the Trend

Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration has risen over the last 250 years by just over 40%, from 275 parts per million (ppm) by volume to almost 400 ppm, and is currently rising at the rate of 2.11 ppm per year, which if sustained means a doubling of the pre-industrial concentration within 70 years.

This change in the chemical composition of the atmosphere has at least three consequences of major concern:

First, by absorbing heat radiated by the Earth to outer space, the carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere warms the planet, though by what amount is highly uncertain due to the complex interactions among climate variables. 

Second, by increasing the efficiency with which plants use water in photosynthesis, it has increased global primary production by, according to some estimates, as much as ten billion tons per year. But not all plants respond to an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration in the same way, so that some species will increase in range and habitat dominance, while others will be at a competitive disadvantage. The net result will be the loss of many species both of plants and of the animals that depend on those plants for food or shelter. 

Third, it appears from current research that rather small increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration may severely impair certain important human cognitive capacities.

The chief causes of rising atmospheric carbon dioxide are: 

Combustion of fossil fuel (65-85% of total change).

Conversion of old-growth forests to short-rotation plantations or bare land with the resultant atmospheric release of carbon fixed in both trees and forest soils (10-25% of total change). 

and the manufacture of cement, which involves the conversion of calcium carbonate to calcium oxide with the release of carbon dioxide (5% of total change).

Cooking with wood. Image source

As the Third World modernizes, scope for reducing worldwide cement usage looks slight to non-existent. There is, however, considerable scope for reducing forest destruction. Approximately half of the timber harvested worldwide is used for fuel wood, and that mainly for cooking over an open fire. Cooking over an open wood fire is highly inefficient. Converting two-thirds of the World's population from the use of fuel wood for cooking to the use of naturqal gas would massively reduce the associated carbon emissions, while also reducing the emission of climate-warming and health-damaging soot and volatile organic compounds. Substantial reduction in timber use as a structural material will be more difficult to achieve, although increasing substitution of oil-based plastics for wood is likely to occur.

Old growth stump versus spindly second growth forest, British
Columbia. Source

Large near-term reductions in carbon emissions can only come through reductions in the use of fossil fuel. Such reduction during a period of Third World modernization may be difficult to achieve, but is essential if a catastrophic poisoning of Earth's environment is to be avoided. For this, three developments are required. 

First, the upgrading of industrial processes to achieve higher energy-use efficiencies. Gas turbine electricity generators, for example, can have an energy-use-efficiency at least 50% higher than most existing coal-fired plants. 

Second, the redesign of the human environment, including residential architecture and transportation systems, to eliminate the massive expenditures of time, capital and energy necessitated  by the suburban/commuter life-style. 

Third, the redirection of consumption from energy intensive goods and services, such as airline travel, SUV's, and monster homes, to low-energy-content goods and services, including bicycles, and health, fitness, educational and religious services.

The efficient commuter. Image source

The challenge is to devise a way of driving the necessary changes in methods of production, life-styles and thinking. But central to any effective change in course will be to tax what we don't want, i.e., carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere, and to avoid taxing all the low-carbon goods and services that we do want. This means a carbon tax is essential. All that is needed is for governments to adjust their budgets to raise revenue from carbon emissions while reducing taxes on income. This will automatically adjust consumption preferences and reduce overall carbon emissions.

Beside its direct effect on carbon emissions, the carbon tax has two other important features. 

First, it will drive increases in carbon-use efficiency in the most cost effective way. Those who can reduce their emissions for less than the cost of the carbon tax will do so, whereas those who cannot reduce their emissions for less than the cost of the carbon tax will pay the tax and continue emitting, though at a reduced rate as the cost of what they sell is raised as a consequence of the carbon tax. Thus will be achieved a reduction in emissions at the lowest overall cost to the economy, with scope for increasing the reduction indefinitely by increases in the carbon tax rate. 

Second, the effective application of a carbon tax can be undertaken by any jurisdiction without consultation or agreement with any other jurisdiction. There is no need for international agreement. All that is needed is a countervailing import tax on goods or services from countries without a carbon tax of comparable severity to one's own. Such a provision not only protects the home industry from unfair foreign competition, but provides other countries with an incentive to introduce their own carbon tax.

Sadly, the beauty of the carbon tax mechanism, which we spelled out eighteen years ago, has yet to be recognized by any national government. It is encouraging, however, that the new government of Canada has promised a national carbon tax, although the value of such a measure will depend upon the details. There must be no exemptions for favored industries or regions and it must be accompanied by a countervailing import tax to protect Canadian jobs from unfair competition.

Related: 

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part III: Induced Stupidity and the Decline of the West

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part II: Ecosystem Disruption

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part I: Carbon Dioxide Is Not a Greenhouse Gas

How Justin Trudeau Could Save the World from Yet Another Futile, Failed, UN Climate Conference, But Won't

James Hansen, former Director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Science, is probably the World's best know climate scientist. It is noteworthy, therefore, when he states that America's position in advance of this week's UN-sponsored Paris conference to formulate mechanisms and agreements to curb human-caused climate warming is:

Unadulterated one hundred percent pure bullshit

You can read here Hanson's concise, logical, and well informed paper providing stunning confirmation of Donald Trump's contention that:

We are led by very, very stupid people.

Human activity affects climate in multiple ways, but chief among these are believed to be those activities that raise the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide; particularly the combustion of fossil fuels, but also the destruction of forests and the manufacture of cement.

The purpose of the Paris conference to which twenty thousand have flown, emitting in the process thousands of tons of climate-changing carbon dioxide, is to complicate the issue beyond all hope of a solution and to instigate all kinds of multi-billion-dollar bureaucratic boondogles before returning home to prepare for the next conference (the current Paris meeting being the 21st), which activity justifies their sense of well-being and self-importance while assuring continuation of their comfy, jet-setting, bureaucratic lifestyles, incomes and pensions.

So what to do?

Simple: tax carbon emissions. This was obvious when I wrote  on the subject 18 years ago following Kyoto, among the first great failed UN Conferences on limiting human-caused climate change, and as I explained in a post here the other day.

Briefly, the thing is to tax carbon emissions while imposing a countervailing duty on goods from countries without a carbon tax. The countervail both protects home industry from unfair competition, while providing countries without a carbon tax the incentive to impose one so as to gather for themselves revenue otherwise collected by their trading partners. Moreover, by adjusting the rate, a carbon tax will achieve any desired reduction in carbon emissions at the lowest overall cost to the economy.

That's it, basically, although as Jim Hansen discusses in his paper linked above, there are some refinements to the idea that may be considered. But whatever the form in which it is applied, the carbon tax is an idea so simple that if any country were to announce a commitment to it the idea would be assured of the world's attention and the world's eventual agreement.

The failure of America, Europe and the Asian giants, China and India, to show leadership in the management of the global atmospheric commons, puts Canada, a country already committed in principle to the idea of a carbon tax, in the position to lead the world. Canada should take the opportunity that the otherwise futile Paris conference provides to announce a national carbon tax with a countervailing, across-the-board duty on imports from countries without a comparable tax, thereby establishing an effective mechanism of control over atmospheric carbon dioxide pollution, which, uncontrolled, will likely have catastrophic effects not only on climate, but on both global biodiversity and human cognitive capacity.

PostScript

Justin Trudeau just announced on the CBC radio that he will be doing something or other in three months time after meeting with the Provincial Premiers. Well, OK, we'll give you three months, Justin, to sort something out with the Provinces. But don't miss this splendid opportunity (when both British Columbia and Alberta, Canada's biggest carbon emitters, already have a carbon tax) to establish a national carbon tax and end what has come to seem like an eternal debate about carbon dioxide and climate change.

PostPostcript

National Post: Bloomberg: Trudeau’s national carbon tax a model that should be ‘widely copied’ around the world

Related:

Toronto Sun: Climate cult all about appearances
(And imposing a UN tax on the world)

Breitbart: Paris Climate Talks Are Doomed Because China Knows ‘Climate Change’ Is A Hoax

Daily Mail: Global warming summit will produce '300,000 TONS of C02'

CanSpeccy: MIT Meteorology Prof, Science Magazine and the Pope Concur: The Reality of Human Caused Climate Change Is an Article of Religious Faith

CanSpeccy: Al Gore’s assault on the integrity of science

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part I: Carbon Dioxide Is Not a Greenhouse Gas

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part II: Ecosystem Disruption

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part III: Induced Stupidity and the Decline of the West

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part IV: Reversing the Trend

James Hansen: Isolation of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue: Part I
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2015/20151127_Isolation.pdf

CNN: COP21? Decoding the UN climate conference's weird acronyms

Telegraph: Paris climate talks: Through the smog, coal-hungry India sees ‘carbon imperialism’ in the West

Politico: Why the Paris climate deal is meaningless

Climate Science RIP

Climate changes: always has, always will.

And human activity affects the climate:

Deforestation above a latitude of around 45 degrees causes climate cooling, reports a paper in Nature by a Yale University led group. (Phew: that's good news, then, since here in Canada we've already logged most of the boreal forest.)

Airborne soot from forest fires, diesel engine exhaust, and coal burning, may warm the climate almost as much as all of the current human-caused increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a recent study in the Journal of Geophysical Research.

Then there's methane from leaking gas pipelines and  flatulent cows, which is about 50 times more potent a so-called greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

And we shouldn't forget the US military that burns through 100 million barrels of oil a year.

But forget it. Al Gore and the other 50,000 or so climate scientists and their political backers and hangers on who recently gathered in Paris at the cost of much emitted carbon have so crassly turned the issue of anthropogenic climate warming/change/cooling/whatever into an instrument of self-advancement or political control that it is impossible now to discuss the subject publicly without becoming the target for vicious insults from proponents of one or other extremist view.

Under those circumstances no scientist other than a charlatan or a dimwit would enter the field. This is unfortunate, because the consequences of changing the chemical composition of the atmosphere should be a matter for careful study by competent persons, not the exclusive preserve of verbal pugilists and the proponents of political correctness.

Doubling atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration may or may not have much effect on the weather, but studies from top labs indicate that it has an extraordinarily severe negative impact on human cognitive capacity. So when Trump says, "we are led by very stupid people" the reason may not be so hard to find.

What is as scary is that raising atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration boosts global primary production, particularly in dry zones. Thus, today, the Australian outback is greening up, as is the African Sahel and the Argentinian pampas. The estimate is that global primary production has been boosted by ten billion tons a year, and CO₂ is up only 40% so far. Double the pre-industrial concentration and the population carrying capacity of Africa and many other parts of the world will double, which should really exacerbate the European immigration crisis.

But, at least we need no longer worry about that damned hockey-stick temperature chart produced by Professor Michael Mann and associates. The thing was, if not a hoax, the result of a remarkably dumb error, as is very nicely explained in this article in MIT's Technology Review. Nature magazine, a leader in the politicization of science, naturally refused to publish the work of Canadians Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, who discovered this error, on the grounds of insufficient interest. Well, Nature, for sure, had insufficient interest.

And here's what happens to a distinguished scientist who asserts the necessity for open inquiry, skepticism and vigorous debate for the effective pursuit of scientific truth:

Professor Judith Curry of Georgia Tech, giving evidence before 
a Congressional committee:



Related: 

CanSpeccy: Extreme Weather? Don't Worry. It's Normal

CanSpeccy: How stupid people win debates

CanSpeccy: The State of Climate Science: Have We Passed Peak Civilization?

CanSpeccy: MIT Meteorology Prof, Science Magazine and the Pope Concur: The Reality of Human Caused Climate Change Is an Article of Religious Faith

CanSpeccy: Nulius in verba: On the word of no one. Or how the Royal Society betrayed its original purpose and became another quasi governmental organization spewing the scientifically correct official line

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part I: Carbon Dioxide Is Not a Greenhouse Gas

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part II: Ecosystem Disruption

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part III: Induced Stupidity and the Decline of the West

CanSpeccy: Rising Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration, Part IV: Reversing the Trend