> The article incorrectly states that the CO2 level is 459ppm, but > perhaps he meant the current lowest realistic maximum.
Actually, he says the CO2 equivalent GHG levels are 459 ppm. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6620909.stm As happens, I wrote an email to Richard Black, advising him of his "minor error" and that CO2 concentrations weren't above 400 ppm, and got a one liner reply that it was for carbon dioxide equivalent ... Strangely though, Moniot's number differs from Richard Black's number, and a bit of googling and looking around the IPCC website led me nowhere. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
