forums energies: society, ecology and clean technologies

By discharging thousands of tons of CO2 in the atmosphere every day, the level of CO2 is increased and consequently the rate of oxygen (20,5% to date) is decreased.
But do not panic the human body knows how to adapt by Darwinian evolution as it has been done for millions of years; it will take a little bigger lungs that's all, it will take a few years of course, I'm not sure to see that Alas .............
It is a pity indeed, because with bigger lungs our women will be more and more like Monica Belluci .....
That happiness global warming ..... Go Ciaoooooooooooooo

The relative decrease of oxygen is not a problem and the adaptation of the human body (if it were necessary) would not be done by an increase of the pulmonary volume (that would require too much time), but, possibly, by intensifying the production of red blood cells. It is obviously more the increase of CO² which is problematic, since it has a powerful influence on the greenhouse effect and on the bio-physical mechanisms of the ocean.

Hello

The relative decrease of oxygen is not a problem and the adaptation of the human body (if it were necessary) would not be done by an increase of the pulmonary volume (that would require too much time), but, possibly, by intensifying the production of red blood cells.

which says increase of the red blood cells means setting in overgun of the living mechanics and thus decrease of longevity. We turn arround!

It is obviously more the increase of CO² which is problematic, since it has a powerful influence on the greenhouse effect and on the bio-physical mechanisms of the ocean.

knowing that the second producer of CO2 and methane is livestock. Which, at present, is constantly increasing in the world. So a little less oil pollution and increase more than sensitive, by ruminating.

With a rate of less than half a thousandth in the atmosphere, CO2 has an impact very close to 0 on the oxygen content of the ambient air ...

And in places where oxygen has actually been scarce for thousands of years (the approaches to Lake Titicaca, or the high valleys of Tibet or Nepal, for example), women do not especially have big breasts; it may be a pity, but it is like that; on the other hand, they wear hats, and this is not by chance ...

What counts is the grams of O2 that arrive in the alveoli of the lungs with each breath: at altitude, the concentration of O2 is almost constant, but it is the density of the air (in addition to the temperature ) which poses a problem for living organisms ...

Janic wrote:which says increase of the red blood cells means setting in overgun of the living mechanics and thus decrease of longevity. We turn arround!

Disagree: the populations of the cities of altitude do not live less long ... on the other hand the cities of altitude were long more polluted (the fault with the thermal engines too rich because without barometric correction) what certainly had an impact on the average life!

I think that the level of CO2, even if it reached 1 or 2% (and we are far from it because towards the 400 ppm or 0,04%) will have a very limited impact on organisms at least directly, because the climate c is another matter!

Christophe wrote:I think that the level of CO2, even if it reached 1 or 2% (and we are far from it because towards the 400 ppm or 0,04%) will have a very limited impact on organisms at least directly, because the climate c is another matter!

Not so obvious

As a result of warming, many planktonic species adapted to temperate waters migrate to the increasingly cold waters of the north, dragging their predators with them, changing the equilibrium of the system. In addition, the accumulation of CO2 in the ocean threatens the proper functioning of the biological pump by causing ocean acidification. This ongoing acidification could alter the rate of the biological engine of the oceanic carbon pump. https://www.futura-sciences.com/planete ... cton-2625/

There is also a negative effect on the growth of fish in general, there have been studies of IFREMER above.

We misunderstood (or I did not express myself correctly): changes in temperatures have a major impact on life, that's for sure.

There I talked about the impact on life of the variation of CO2 in the air (and not in the oceans, this is not the subject of discussion, where there is a known and destructive effect of acidification) ... just this factor, not other consequences!

In other words: I was only talking about the impact of the chemical modification of the atmosphere ... Impact which should remain rather weak until 1 or 2% ... see more.

NASA has, of course, already done these atmospheric modification tests on humans (and other organisms) decades ago ...

What is the lethal dose% CO2 for humans?

CO2 is deadly by asphyxiation at a concentration of 6% https://www.bul.ch/fr/home-fr/presseart ... ortel.html

and the atmosphere is not just an O / CO2 ratio.
You had specified "not directly", but the carbon cycle impacts all living things and the oceans cover 70% of the globe and then there is a gas exchange between the atmosphere and the oceans. You cannot isolate one element without taking the rest into account.

Christophe wrote:What is the lethal dose% CO2 for humans?

Apparently with 100 000ppm (10%), it's death in minutes.

izentrop wrote:You can not isolate an element without considering the rest.

Okay but the subject is in the title, talk about Atmosphere ... where my reasoning ...