The Physics of the Carbon Cycle: About the Origin of CO2 in the Atmosphere

Aims: Examination of the correctness of some assumptions of IPCC regarding climate. Discussion of consequences. Methodology: Explanation of terms used by IPCC and clarification of consequences, identification of prerequisites for the validity/applicability of these terms and scrutiny of their fulfillment under real-world conditions, discussion of consequences. Results: Based on the laws of physics and logic, two central terms used by IPCC, i.e. the fixed "airborne fraction", and the constant "CO2-budget” cannot exist in reality. The first states that about 50 % of the CO2 emitted by humans (the “airborne fraction”) stay in the atmosphere for centuries or longer (the other about 50 % leaving it within maximum a few years), the latter is the maximum value of cumulative net global anthropogenic emissions that is allowed, if global warming should be kept below a given level, for example 2 °C. According to their definition, both values are independent of the temporal distribution of the anthropogenic emissions. But physics speaks against their existence. And also the “Bern Cabon Cycle Model”, used by IPCC as an alternative method to analyze the carbon cycle, cannot be correct, because it is based on incorrect physical boundary conditions. The inadmissibility of the two terms is also supported by observations of the fast decay of 14CO2 after the atomic bomb test stop agreement. Conclusion: If the considerations made here are correct, IPCC's assessment of the sharp increase in CO2 concentration being a consequence of anthropogenic releases implodes. Consequently, the assessment of global warming to be man-made is justified no more, and the necessity to terminate all anthropogenic releases of CO2 for climate protection reasons becomes superfluous. The considerations made here appear to be very reliable, but in view of the far-reaching consequences, a careful review by the scientific community seems to be urgently needed.