Japanese Satellites say 3rd World Owes CO2 Reparations to The West

Well, in a somewhat bizarre twist, it looks like I must reconsider my opposition to CO2 reparations. The notion that the evil sources of CO2 “pollution” must pay those who are lowering the planet’s CO2 levels.

It seems that the Japanese have a nice tool on orbit and set out to figure out who was a “maker” and who was a “taker” in the CO2 production / consumption game. (h/t to kuhnkat in an o.t. comment. Seems they found out that CO2 was largely net absorbed in the industrialized ‘west’ and net created in the ‘3rd world’. So pony up the cash, China, Brazil, and Africa. I want my environmental compensation!

This isn’t that much of a surprise to me. I’d figured out some time ago that trees and bamboo could consume far more CO2 than I “produce” via burning oil and gas. I’ve also pointed out that The West is largely letting trees grow, while mowing our lawns and having the clippings “sequestered” in land fills (along with an untold tonnage of phone books and junk mail…) while the 3rd world is busy burning and cutting down their forests. The simple fact is that “jungle rot” will beat out my “gallon a day” of Diesel any time. Basically, we in the west grow far more wheat, corn, soybeans, wood, lawns, shrubs, etc. than we burn oil. In the 3rd world, they burn their sequestering plants. (And it takes one heck of a lot more wood to cook a meal than it does coal via a highly efficient furnace / electric generator / microwave oven.) But it’s nice to see it documented in aggregate in the “facts in the air”.

On To The Data

OK, the original link had a tiny little graphic. I found a larger version, that I’ve lifted for here. Attribution will be given, and as an ‘educational / news use’, I think it falls under ‘fair use’ doctrine. First off, the original link story is:


I found a larger version of the same graphic here:

http://antigreen.blogspot.com/ (though I haven’t figured out how to get a link to just the article in question from Oct 31, 2011) but since both of them seem to have lifted an NHK graphic, I’m going to reproduce it here:

NHK World JAXA CO2 chart

NHK World JAXA CO2 chart

Green is net CO2 absorption. Red is net CO2 release. It’s pretty clear that The West is net absorbing. So, about those reparations, China and Brazil?

I’m adding this ‘Quality improvement’ graphic for comparison from a link in comments:

JAXA quality improvment

JAXA quality improvment

You can see it’s a quite different graphic from the NHK one with different content. Same format, though.

From the “antigreen” site:

Global warming alarmism is turned on its head and the supposed role of carbon dioxide in climate change may be wrong, if the latest evidence from Japan’s scientists is to be believed.

Japanese national broadcaster, NHK World, broke the astonishing story on their main Sunday evening news bulletin (October 30, 2011). Television viewers learned that the country’s groundbreaking IBUKU satellite, launched in June 2009, appears to have scorched an indelible hole in conventional global warming theory.

Standing in front of a telling array of colorful graphs, sober-suited Yasuhiro Sasano, Director of Japan’s National Institute for Environmental Studies told viewers, “The [IBUKU satellite] map is to help us discover how much each region needs to reduce CO2 [carbon dioxide] emissions.”
Indeed, the map at which JAXA spokesman Sasano was pointing (see photo above) had been expected by most experts to show that western nations are to blame for substantial increases in atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide, causing global warming. But to an officious looking TV interviewer Sasano turned greenhouse gas theory on it’s head.

According to UN science the greenhouse gas theory says more CO2 entering the atmosphere will warm the planet, while less CO2 is associated with cooling.

Gesturing to an indelible deep green hue streaked across the United States and Europe viewers were told, “in the high latitudes of the Northern hemisphere emissions were less than absorption levels.”

Sasano proceeded to explain the color-coding system of the iconic maps showing where regions were either absorbing or emitting the trace atmospheric gas. Regions were alternately colored red (for high CO2 emission), white (low or neutral CO2 emissions) and green (no emissions: CO2 absorbers).

Bizarrely, the IBUKU maps prove exactly the opposite of all conventional expectations revealing that the least industrialized regions are the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases on the planet.

Yes, you read that correctly: the U.S. and western European nations are areas where CO2 levels are lowest. This new evidence defies the consensus view promoted by mainstream newspapers, such as the New York Times.

From the “suite101” link:

New Satellite Data Contradicts Carbon Dioxide Climate Theory
Oct 30, 2011
John O’Sullivan

Industrialized nations emit far less carbon dioxide than the Third World, according to latest evidence from Japan’s Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA).

Global warming alarmism is turned on its head and the supposed role of carbon dioxide in climate change may be wrong, if the latest evidence from Japan’s scientists is to be believed.

Japanese national broadcaster, NHK World, broke the astonishing story on their main Sunday evening news bulletin (October 30, 2011). Television viewers learned that the country’s groundbreaking IBUKU satellite, launched in June 2009, appears to have scorched an indelible hole in conventional global warming theory.

Standing in front of a telling array of colorful graphs, sober-suited Yasuhiro Sasano, Director of Japan’s National Institute for Environmental Studies told viewers, “The [IBUKU satellite] map is to help us discover how much each region needs to reduce CO2 [carbon dioxide] emissions.”

Huge Headache for Climate Policymakers

JAXA boasts that, “we can reduce the error of the estimated values when we introduce IBUKI’s observation data compared to that of the values calculated in a conventional way based on ground observation data.”

To all policymakers who study the Japanese maps it is apparent that the areas of greatest CO2 emissions are those regions with least human development and most natural vegetation: Equatorial Third World nations.

The Japanese evidence also disproves the often-cited hypothesis that Siberia and other areas of northern Russia were natural vents for large scale CO2 outgassing, exacerbating global warming fears.

In effect, this compelling new data appears to show that the ashphalt and concreted industrial nations are ‘mopping up’ carbon dioxide faster than their manufacturers and consumers can emit it. If this is confirmed, it means a cornerstone of man-made global warming may be in serious doubt.

It goes on to explore the question of just how much “carbon taxes” will be endorsed by the folks who are actually consuming and sequestering more CO2 than they are producing. Well, I think we will endorse them just fine, as long as they are applied to the net producers of CO2: Brazil, China, Africa. And, of course, paid to us. I’ll be sitting here holding my breath while I wait for my payment /sarcoff>

The dilemma is whether the established UN global warming policy of the ‘polluter pays’ can any longer be sensibly upheld. Conventional political thinking at previous UN climate conferences was to ‘offset’ carbon emissions by making the worst polluters pay higher ‘carbon taxes.’ But that theory now appears to be rendered redundant being that western economies, believed to be the worst offenders, are in fact, contributing either negligible or no measurable CO2 emissions whatsoever.

Indeed, the IBUKU data indicates that the areas of highest CO2 emissions are precisely those regions with most vegetation and least industry and thus less able to pay.

Thus, the unthinkable could be made real: the greenhouse gas theory of climate change may collapse in the face of empirical evidence that industrialization is shown to have no link to global warming.

I expect we’ll be seeing a whole lot of Song & Dance and not so much logic and reason – as usual… But one can hope.

Personally, I’d like to see that NHK graphic made into a flag and flown over the affair. Perhaps even put on T-Shirts with the slogan “Make the Evil 3rd World PAY for CO2 Pollution!!”. It would certainly get some “discussion” going ;-)

The Source

In doing some digging I came up with some actual source press release publications from Japan. These are the “laymans version” but have some decent content:


I found this methane graph from that press release rather interesting. Isn’t methane supposed to be far worse than CO2?

JAXA Methane 20091030_ibuki_3_e

JAXA Methane 20091030_ibuki_3_e

Such pretty red dots in Africa, Saudi Arabia, India / Pakistan… (May they someday decide who owns Kashmir) Maybe we can get the OPEC nations to pony up some reparations to The West, too! I’ll take mine as Diesel, please. A gallon a day ought to do it… It also looks like “high cold places” in Russia, Greenland, and Alaska tend not to have much stuff rotting and making methane. Maybe we can get Brazil to pay reparations in Beef. About a pound / day / person ought to do it… What do you say, Russia and Alaska, “A STEAK A DAY – IT’S ALL WE ASK” sound catchy?


Has more on the CO2 story. Along with an ‘uncalibrated’ CH4 graph, there is this one of CO2:

Jaxa CO2 20090829_ibuki_1Le

Jaxa CO2 20090829_ibuki_1Le

China sure stands out…

Then again, it looks like maybe Georgia (the USA one, not the original…) may need to pay reparations to California… And it’s pretty darned clear to me that New York City needs to pay a boat load of reparations to “Fly Over Country” from Nevada to Texas and on to Ohio. Oh, and Mr. Gates up in Seattle? Looks like you folks owe some to Oregon, Idaho, and Montana, so open that wallet. Now please.

One other small note: Looks like Australia and New Zealand get a “Climate Guilt Free Pass” for sure. Just look at all that blue!

Go you Kiwis and Oz! I suggest a “carbon tax” on all minerals shipped to China. About what you pay for Chinese imports ought to cover it ;-)

In Conclusion

I’m sure there are more links; and more formal papers out there. I’ve not had the time to dig into them. If anyone can find peer reviewed papers and post links, that would be “a good thing”. For now, I think it’s pretty clear that the “CO2 From the Evil Western Polluters” meme has a serious hole in it…

Gotta love those Japanese researchers. Just take the data, show what it says, and let the truth land where it may. Well done, sirs. Well done indeed. I think I feel a trip to the local Sushi Bar coming on. “Yellowtail” / hamachi is my favorite, and it comes from farmed fish in / near Japan. Easy way to say “thank you”, IMHO… Oh, and some authentic Japanese Sake… Kampai!

UPDATE: Adding an animated GIF of the XCO2 from comments

I’m not sure what makes XCO2 different from CO2, but it is stated as ppm as the units, so I presume it is a concentration measure, perhaps with a calibration marker? At any rate, ppm and the values make it look to me like a straight CO2 concentration metric. With that, the graphic:

XCO2 over time animation

XCO2 over time animation

Subscribe to feed


About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in AGW Science and Background and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

49 Responses to Japanese Satellites say 3rd World Owes CO2 Reparations to The West

  1. Oh, no, my friend, you have it all wrong. You see, the IBUKU satellite and its companions were hacked by the Chinese military’s Titan Rain operation.

    China, despite their relatively poor appearance, has just decided to move from the Third World to the First World — and is ready for those reparations to arrive.

    Incidentally, the time of year is significant for those charts. China is the world’s largest (industrial) producer of CO2 for about nine months out of the year — but the other three months, it’s Brazil.

    ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

  2. I probably should not mix humor and fact in the same post. The top paragraph of the previous comment is (so far as I know) a joke, the bottom is serious, and the middle is somewhere in-between.

    ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

  3. Richard Ilfeld says:

    I hope its true. Its definitely inconvenient. Science is so hard when you have to actually do research.
    The excursions of our climate have been extreme on the cold side for several millenia; when the next ice age comes — now that’ll be climate change worth worrying about.
    In the meantime, why doesn’t the government go back to filing potholes, fixing bridges, and generally staying out of the energy business.
    Sorry about that new carbon tax, California.

  4. Larry Geiger says:

    Dude!!! Total badness.

    There is always something about turning the tables that is exciting :-)

  5. tckev says:

    @Keith DeHavelle

    Umm, interesting name Titan as Wikipedia succinctly puts it “In Greek mythology, the Titans (Greek: Τιτάν – Ti-tan; plural: Τιτᾶνες – Ti-tânes) were a race of powerful deities, descendants of Gaia and Uranus, that ruled during the legendary Golden Age.”
    Descendants of Gaia…
    You could start a really powerful family of urban myths with that! (pun intended).

  6. Will says:

    I’m having surprising difficulty finding more on this…
    I can only find the single Suite101.com article and the NHK page … doesn’t seem to be any other references on the web… The “Source” data referenced above is from 2009

    Anyone have access to the “Scientific Online Letters on the Atmosphere (an online thesis magazine) issued by the Meteorological Society of Japan on Oct. 29” where this is apparently published? http://www.jaxa.jp/projects/sat/gosat/index_e.html

  7. Pingback: Global warming tables turn | Dawn of a New Day

  8. Mahnus B says:

    The house of cards is falling down!

    This measurements goes hand in hand with what Murry Salsby discovered.
    The IPCC have got the whole carboncycle wrong. Even a three year old can understand that. Journalists can be no more than two!

  9. H.R. says:

    That might explain why the Japanese said “Nyet” to a Kyoto extension. The official resaon was that they weren’t gonna play if no one else was (and that’s good enough reason) but they may have had a heads up from early returns of the data.

    I can’t recall if they said no to Kyoto II before or after the launch.

    Oh… where’s my check?

  10. Chuckles says:

    Yup, saw this earlier, love it, but I’m sure it will be universally ignored by all right thinking people?

    People have been pointing out for years that gaiais holy rainforests are not the ‘lungs of the planet’ but are usually sources of CO2, but it’s ignored, and the received wisdom continues to be parroted by the clerisy.

    And as for ‘well mixed’, heh, heh, heh.

  11. Espen says:

    hmm, I remain a little skeptical until I get the facts here – what if (for instance) this was measured in a short time in NH summer?

  12. sandy mcclintock says:

    On the subject of Chinese hacking… The scale of their operation is awesome! They are reputed to have ‘one division’ (in the military sense) dedicated to such activities. For a sense of scale, Australia’s entire Army, Navy, and Air-force would be about the same numerically as 1 division.

  13. sandy mcclintock says:

    I am confused… Map 1 (the first) says Aus is a slight net producer of CO2, but the last map says we have a lower CO2 level than many places. I presume this is averaged over all altitudes (column average)

  14. Scarlet Pumpernickel says:

    Funny how Japan changes it’s tune when it can’t use Nuclear anymore and needs to go back to Gas and Coal. LOL the scam is exposed. What happens if France reactors have a melt down, suddenly CO2 is ok?

  15. And another map on the same site shows all pinks for the US, with heavier in the southwest. It is peculiar.

    Certainly the “promotional” piece for the satellite (their word) features climate change as an Urgent Imperative (at about 0:20):

    “A major issue requiring urgent attention … is Climate Change.” They flatly blame Climate Change on humans, with no qualifications whatsoever (double meaning intended). And carbon dioxide and methane are the “primary contributors” to the greenhouse effect. If water vapor has any role, it doesn’t rate a mention there:

    This is official JAXA, the people behind this satellite. It does not seem likely that a contrary result will be allowed to stand without “reinterpretation.”

    ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

  16. Incidentally, the first three minutes of that six-minute video are spent flogging the global warming issue. This was made before the satellite was launched, and features the IBUKI GOSAT as well as the US OCO working together. (The OCO was destroyed in 2009, and never made it to orbit. The payload fairing did not separate, and this happened again on the same Taurus rocket a few months ago. NASA has put a freeze on work for an OCO-2 replacement because of these failures.)

    Multiple times on that video, the tremendous CO output of Brazil is featured, visibly dwarfing that of the US (though there’s no voice-over comment on this). China and Brazil’s CO2 output is featured in the first ten seconds or so.

    Here’s a cleaner link, since embedding didn’t quite work as I’d hoped:

    ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

  17. E.M.Smith says:


    Near as I can tell, they are collecting multiyear data for the globe. Satellites tend to do that, and their data looks to be of that sort.

    @Sandy Mcclintock:

    There’s plenty to trip over here. I’ve got one graph of CO2 and another of CH4, the CO2 at least being “uncalibrated” (partly just to show what the ‘sort of raw’ data look like). Then there is an NHK graphic that looks like a multi-year integration, but clearly with some kinds of geographical borders used to corral the data. OK, nothing as clean as I’d like, but a decent “heads up” pointer.

    Exactly what is the ‘calibration’ and how are the geographic ‘homogenizing’ done? Need to get the actual papers for that…

    For now, best I can suggest is to pick the picture that most strongly supports your preferences ;-)

  18. kuhnkat says:

    I want Ferdinand Englebeen to come by and explain to us how he could have missed this!!! I believe he is one of the most expert in this area who has been pooh poohing everyone who disagreed with the idea that man could be causing the increase in CO2 all by ourselves!!

    This data would seem to indicate that it really is based on sinks and sources and the sinks around the sources mostly suck up the CO2. Funny that, CO2 fertilizes plants so helps grow their own sink!!!!!

    If China and India wasn’t so bent on industrializing they could have been landscaping at the same time and probably wouldn’t be that much worse than our East Coast!! Australia and New Zealand are lucky in that they are islands and benefit from the enormous biotic capacity of their surroundings!! Then again, Australia is also mostly EMPTY and NZ isn’t heavily occupied either!!!! So the areas with the highest CO2 levels have several items in common. Large, heavy, dirty industry. Poor environmental policies. High population densities.

    That being said, it is time for the EXPERTS to revisit Beck, Mauna Loa, and the Ice Cores and try and understand what they have been missing and misinterpreting!!! That is, if they are really serious about understanding the climate and not just promoting the Climate Scam!!!

  19. Jeff Alberts says:

    Well, I use a mulching mower on my 2.5 acres. So no sequestered clippings. But the weeds do love it so.

  20. Joanie in Carlsbad says:

    Now, the scientists and political types will say that the Western world needs to pay for the Third World to upgrade their industries and power plants, and so that they don’t need to slash and burn their forests. We’ll still be in the same boat, only instead of guilt for being net producers, we will have guilt for our lifestyles that allow us to live as cleanly as we do. Just watch. If this study stands up to scrutiny, that is how they will play it.
    Bad, bad us for keeping them poor. Terrible, the way we force them to make our trivial toys and electronics, so that they can’t afford anything but the most polluting power sources imaginable. Oh, the shame…

  21. E.M.Smith says:

    @Jeff Alberts:

    Look up ‘soil tilth’. Even if you just do mulching, carbon ends up in the soil as tilth. The roots and the bits of leaves that worms eat and poop out as ‘casts’ in the soil.

    The ‘parkway strip’ between my yard and the street was about 6 inches above the cement when I moved in. Graded it flat and took a pickup load to the dump to be ‘sequestered’ in a land fill. Now, about 25 years later, it is once again about 6 inches above the cement. (Closer to a foot near the tree trunk that’s a good 15 cm more in diameter) Yup. Soil being built by all those lawn critters and grasses and tree roots. Sequestration in action.

    So don’t disparage your mulching mower all that quickly… The soil still grows.

  22. kuhnkat says:


    I think I got this one WRONG!!

    Here is the paper with explanations of the map:


    It talks about a reduction in the uncertainty of measuring the fluxes, NOT, on the magnitude of the flux. Apparently O’Sullivan didn’t understand the broadcast, to be kind, and didn’t look at the paper. The data from the the other maps should be relatively good though with their reduced uncertainty.

    The next time i bring up something ask me if I have double checked it first!!

  23. kuhnkat says:

    Here is a page where Jaxa has an animation of the CO2 as opposed to the uncertainty:


    and the animation:

    Wish i had done these searches earlier.

  24. E.M.Smith says:


    Nice find on the paper. Not so sure I’m liking this part:

    In estimating surface CO2 fluxes with Bayesian inverse modeling
    schemes, observations are contrasted with corresponding
    predictions made by an atmospheric transport model in which the
    first guess (or a priori) estimates of the surface fluxes and a set of
    unit fluxes with pre-specified patterns are run forward to simulate
    CO2 concentrations. The surface fluxes are estimated by making
    corrections to the a priori fluxes such that the mismatches between
    the model predictions and observations are minimized. For this
    study, we used version 08.1 of the National Institute for Environmental
    Studies atmospheric transport model (Belikov et al. 2011),

    I’d been a little bit bothered that the ‘press release’ graphs were ‘uncalibrated’, now I’m rather a bit more happy they have not been ‘calibrated’ to assure “mismatches between model predictions and observations are minimized”…

    I rather like observations that are just observed…


    I think I have to take exception to your moaning about getting ‘this one WRONG”. My read on the first paper shows it to be different from the topic of the NHK graphic. Look at Saudi. It’s blue in the paper, not so in the NHK graphic. (I’ve put a copy of the Blue Saudi graphic next to the NHK graphic above). They are different maps of different things…. So, IMHO, the “reduced uncertainty” paper is just that, a paper about uncertainty reductions and NOT the same as the topic of the NHK graphic. (The paper does do a good job of explaining the regions on the map and how the monthly averaging is done, so still nice to know).

    Looking at the animation links and doing a visual integration I get a map of CO2 production roughly in keeping with the NHK graphic. Again, different in that it’s showing the monthly values, not the overall integration, but still, there is a whole lot more red in the tropics and a whole lot more blue up north. (It looks to me like ‘spring rotting / summer growth’ dominate the CO2 budget and warm places rot more than cold ones… Not much from the industrial side dominating the planet. I find the ocean area flux changes interesting as they speak to ocean dominance. If it was just land CO2 being spread over the oceans I’d expect to see more streaking, banding, and things following wind patterns from land to ocean, not large area moves by latitude band.)

    So IMHO you need to stop the self flagellation and look again at the links and data. Looks to me like you jumped to quickly to the worry side of things. To me it’s all just good stuff… (minus the moaning, of course ;-)

  25. David A says:

    Hum? I thought USA CO2 production was a boon to the third world, enabling farmers everywhere to grow ten percent plus more food with the same water and soil conditions, and now I guess we are not the world benefactors I thought.

  26. Pingback: Bloodthirsty Liberal » Third World, First Polluters

  27. kuhnkat says:


    I actually thought that O’Sullivan’s editorial was valid. The original map is just a pictorial of how much the uncertainty was reduced!!

    I agree that the raw data still shows interesting new features different from the assumptions of the Mauna Loa and Finglebeen types, but, it isn’t as dramatic as what I had intially swallowed from O’Sullivan.

    I guess I’ll just have to get over it!! 8>)

  28. View from the Solent says:

    Interestingly, the suite101 article has been disappeared. Your link now points to an anodyne ‘Featured Articles’ page.

  29. E.M.Smith says:


    Um, please read the update again. I think that O’Sullivan’s editorial IS valid.

    The page you linked with an ‘uncertainty’ map has a different map. See the comparison I added to the posting.

  30. Pingback: This could upset the Kyoto applecart | JunkScience.com

  31. Pingback: Satellite Data Shows Third World Emits Far More CO2 Than The West « Barnaby Is Right

  32. Pascvaks says:

    I’ll wager that as soon as Iran launches it’s first “Green” Satellite they’re going to say all the First Worlders cause all the CO2 and call for a jihad or something worse. No doubt the Chinese aren’t too happy that the Japanese are mouthing off about something that’s strictly Chinese internal business. One planet, many worlds, lot’s of political friction. Anyone subscribe to the belief that ‘political friction’ causes ‘global warming’? Yep! We need a head tax! UN dues should be a function of population, not GDP. I’ll vote for that one. I think we ought to let the Chinese build a new UN HQ too and put it in Peking. (The current HQ isn’t very “green” and it is kind’a old and sleezy.) Any objections? No objections. Sold! The UN goes to China. Good riddence.

  33. Gail Combs - NC USA says:


    I want Ferdinand Englebeen to come by and explain to us how he could have missed this!!! I believe he is one of the most expert in this area who has been pooh poohing everyone who disagreed with the idea that man could be causing the increase in CO2 all by ourselves!!

    I am sure he will look. I am having a “Discussion” with him about CO2 test methods at WUWT and linked here.

    If you want to know why all those third world countries, esp in the tropics emit so much CO2 ….

    It is because of the TERMITES!!!!
    termite CO2 production: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/218/4572/563

    “According to the journal Science (Nov. 5, 1982), termites alone emit ten times more carbon dioxide than all the factories and automobiles in the world. Natural wetlands emit more greenhouse gases than all human activities combined. (If greenhouse warming is such a problem, why are we trying to save all the wetlands?)”
    Termites emit ten times more CO2 than humans. Should we cap-and-tax them?

  34. Pingback: Oh, About Those Third-World AGW Repararations… « SOYLENT GREEN

  35. kuhnkat says:


    yes, I have pointed people to the ant and termite production numbers before!! Ain’t nature amazing?? Did you see the recent paper claiming that natural watercourses are much more productive in methane than the old estimates??

    Of course, termites may have large output, but, probably aren’t the only “polluters!!” We need to start charging them. 8>)

    This puts the Salby lecture and book in a whole new light in my opinion!!

  36. kuhnkat says:

    View from Solent,

    the important thing is that O’Sullivan has us looking at the Ibuki JAXA data!! There are enough people trying to personally destroy him that it is probably good to separate it from him. Over at Curry’s and Lucia’s that is the first thing posted. O’Sullivan is part of the Slayer’s yadayadayada.

    I thank him for bringing it to our attention whether I think he exagerated or not.

  37. TIM CLARK says:

    “@Jeff Alberts:

    Look up ‘soil tilth’.”

    Then humic acid, the long lasting CO2.

  38. Joel Heinrich says:

    The first map shows just the net flux in July. You can see the fluxes for October, January and April here:


    Or the results from the land based measurements:

    Click to access 11_plate2_co2.pdf

  39. soilpest says:

    What about Canada’s oil sands production barely registering, and Canada as a whole being a very large net CO2 & CH4 sink?

  40. Pingback: Australia CO2 emissions…amongst the lowest | pindanpost

  41. Jostemikk says:

    This story have a history:


    “E.M.Smith says:
    September 13, 2009 at 11:40 pm

    The talk of all the “fiddling” and adjusting they need to do makes me a bit nervous…

    So why are Canada and Siberia all white? Poor high latitude coverage?

    OK, what about Brazil?

    Oh, and as for why the USA is so low, look at all that corn, soybeans, trees, et. al. growing darned near everywhere between the cities. Then look at all the trees and lawns in the suburbs.

    We are just sucking one heck of a lot of CO2 out of the air with plants.”

    By the way, I love your blog. I’ve been a regular reader quite some time. Greetings from Norway!

  42. Pingback: Climate Conversation Group » Suppression of sceptical views continues

  43. Besides being possibly the best news I’ve heard this year, and something which pits the reason for the very existence of the IPCC in question, it proves something a lot more sinister. A week after the release who has been told? Which media outlet, TV or newspaper, has reported it? This was a mainstream project expected to provide ammunition for calls for greater and faster restrictions. The result is crystal clear, the CO2 emitter theory is wrong. Simple as. So unless the media are incompetent (not really) then they must be biased and worse still possible even prevented in some way from reporting. The cat’s out of the bag, with the internet people will slowly find out regardless, and the media will look like total crooks for leaving this one alone. This is more damning for the media than science as at least the science is beginning to catch up with reality at long last.

  44. Pingback: Australia’s coming ‘dark age’… | pindanpost

  45. I live in Atlanta, which is that red dot in the State of Georgia in the XCO2 graphic.

    Lots of cars, asphalt and glass buildings, leading me to think that ‘climate change’ is a local phenomenon associated with urbanization.

  46. Pingback: Moonbattery » CO2 Reparations: Not Such a Bad Idea After All

  47. Pingback: Third World Owes First World CO2 Reparations? - Christian Forums

  48. Pingback: New Satellite Data Contradicts Carbon Dioxide Climate Theory

  49. Pingback: UN to Spend Trillions Trying to Create a Perpetual Motion Machine | Blog of Dale B. Halling, LLC - Intellectual Property & Patent Innovation, Attorney - Powered by Clvr.Tv

Comments are closed.