How much carbon dioxide is in the air'
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Tuesday, Sept. 22, 2009
To the Editor:
What percent of the air is carbon dioxide• It is a question I have asked 150 local residents of many random ages, professions and educational backgrounds.
A special uncirculated Lincoln penny is offered as a prize for an answer that is within 5 percent of the correct answer.
The question was asked in the spirit of providing a learning experience for me and a potential learning experience for the individuals being questioned. With carbon dioxide being framed as the major player in the global warming game and the focus of a wide range of new and much higher taxes (cap and trade), I wondered if the general public knew the salient carbon dioxide facts.
Did most people know the percent of carbon dioxide in the air ... how much has that percentage increased in the last 50 years• Isn't carbon dioxide plant food and essential for producing food for all animals ... including humans?
The most common answer for my question was that air contained 60 percent carbon dioxide. More than half of the people answered that air was more than 50 percent carbon dioxide.
One person said that all air was carbon dioxide. Ten people out of 150 gave an answer of 10 percent or lower. Three people gave an answer of 2 percent or lower. One person gave an answer of lower than 1 percent.
All who gave an answer were presented with the trophy penny, given the correct answer and asked to put the question to someone else.
It was great fun and an interesting learning experience for me, and certainly everyone learned something. The correct answer is air has a carbon dioxide concentration of less than one tenth of a percent and air has no more carbon dioxide than it did 50 years ago.
Do we need new and higher carbon dioxide taxes (cap and trade) to save the planet?
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Consequences in space
- Tragedy’s ramifications II
- Tragedy sensationalized
- Valley musical superb
- Seek not vengance, but love
- Tragedy’s ramifications I
- Tragedy’s ramifications III
- Stop currying Saudis’ favor
- Resurrection? Really?
- Pot & Pa.
- Resurrection is real