Are Volcanic Emissions Really Greater Than Man-Made Greenhouse Gases?

[OSalcido]

is it true that there are more greenhouse gasses released from a single Volcanic eruption than all of the gasses produced by man since the industrial revolution?

If so, shouldn't that silence the global-warming advocates?

 

[Bystander]

No, hence, no.

 

[OSalcido]

Any references would be appreciated

 

[Bystander]

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~gwk/research/NMDP_Report_Jan2006.pdf

This is the lower end of the range of estimates for annual volcanic emissions. You'll run into estimates three times greater.

 

[billiards]

Probably not from a single eruption, but combined volcanoes do pump out more greenhouse gases than people. Umm, i can't really talk about global warming and atmosphere stuff cos it's not really my thing. But I believe that volcanoes pump out sulphate aerosoles, these things cool the Earth down - I guess they increase the planet's albedo.

 

[Skyhunter]

Any references would be appreciated

Volcanic emissions of CO₂ are approximately 1% that of anthropogenic emissions.

http://www.bgs.ac.uk/programmes/landres/segs/downloads/VolcanicContributions.pdf

That is another common denialist talking point that has been thoroughy debunked years ago.

 

[Andre]

Volcanic emissions of CO₂ are approximately 1% that of anthropogenic emissions.

http://www.bgs.ac.uk/programmes/landres/segs/downloads/VolcanicContributions.pdf

That is another common denialist talking point that has been thoroughy debunked years ago.

And that's a strawman. There is no serious debate about the origine of the CO2. The volcangenetic CO2 is completely irrelevant. The essential problem with a strong GHG effect is the triple falsification of the positive feedback idea which is the key mechanism to catastrophic global warming.

 

[inol]

The recent "Global Warming Swindle" documentary for example made the claim that volcanoes emit more CO2 than man, and I have had plenty of arguments with people claiming that there is debate about the origin of the co2. Clearly it's not a strawman to say that it's a common argument used by skeptics.

 

[ray b]

true lies and half truth

over total history I think the volcano's win
as they have been around a lot longer then man
but billions or even millions of years ago old CO2
is long gone and plays no part in the current events

but over a given year no
maybe higher at peak in a real intence event
for a short period of time?
data sure is being SPUN
by both sides

 

[BillJx]

true lies and half truth

over total history I think the volcano's win
as they have been around a lot longer then man
but billions or even millions of years ago old CO2
is long gone and plays no part in the current events

but over a given year no
maybe higher at peak in a real intence event
for a short period of time?
data sure is being SPUN
by both sides

Of course there will be false arguments from some individuals on both sides, but the wholesale falsification of data is overwhelmingly on one side. Answers to most "skeptic" arguments are well known and can be found here, among many other places.
http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics

There's a much more wordy description of skeptic arguments here; it's a year old but doubt about AGW has only decreased since it was written. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301305_pf.html