The Second Largest Increase in CO2 Concentrations for Any September Has Been Recorded at Mauna Loa.
As I've indicated repeatedly in my DU writings, somewhat obsessively I keep spreadsheets of the of the daily, weekly, monthly and annual data at the Mauna Loa Carbon Dioxide Observatory, which I use to do calculations to record the dying of our atmosphere, a triumph of fear, dogma and ignorance that did not have to be, but nonetheless is, a fact.
Facts matter.
When writing these depressing repeating posts about new records being set, reminiscent, over the years, to the ticking of a clock at a deathwatch, I often repeat some of the language from a previous post on this awful series, as I am doing here with some modifications. It saves time.
A recent post (not my last on this topic) reflecting the annual record being set is here:
A New Record Concentration for CO2, 427.98 ppm Has Been Set for the Mauna Loa CO2 Observatory's Weekly Average.
A more recent example, with a title of this series, which this post modifies slightly, is here:
Update on the Disastrous 2024 CO2 Data Recorded at Mauna Loa
This post refers to the monthly data, the comparison of the difference between the average of September 2024 with the average reading of September 2023.
The data is here:
September 2024: 422.03 ppm
September 2023: 418.51 ppm
Last updated: Oct 05, 2024
Monthly Average Mauna Loa CO2
If one has not joined Greenpeace and thus can do simple arithmetic, one can see that the average for September 2024 is 3.52 ppm higher than that of September 2023.
There are 66 such data points recorded on the Mauna Loa CO2 Observatory's data pages with which one can do these comparisons. Of all 66 such Septembers, this is the second 2nd worst one ever recorded for any September.
The worst increase for any September was that of September 1998 over September 1997. Before the 21st century, 1998 was the worst year ever recorded for increases at Mauna Loa, a result of the fact that huge stretches of the Malaysian and Indonesian rainforests caught fire when slash and burn fires went out of control. These fires were set deliberately, designed to add palm oil plantations to satisfy the demand for "renewable" biodiesel for German cars and trucks as part of their "renewable energy portfolio." 1998 was thus something of an anomaly. The average increase for all months in the period between March of 1959 and and December of 1999 was 1.30 ppm. From January of 2000 to September of 2024, the average is 2.24 ppm.
The worst increase for any month for any year also occurred in 2024, this past March:
March 2024 Was the worst Month Ever for CO2 Increases Measured at the Mauna Loa CO2 Observatory.
The increase over March of 2023 was 4.38 ppm. February of 2024 was also over 4.00 ppm higher than February 2023, 4.25 ppm higher to be exact. Only four months in the 785 monthly comparators available exceeded 4.00 ppm over the previous year, two this year, and two in 2016.
The same media that loves to promote a seriously intellectually crippled serial rapist and con man and felon as a viable Presidential candidate likes to talk about a so called "energy transition" that is supposed to save our asses.
This highly advertised propaganda is connected with the unsupportable belief that the vast sums of money spent so called "renewable energy," which I personally regard as reactionary as the six thugs of the apocalypse in the rogue US Supreme Court, is about addressing climate change.
If so, the money is clearly wasted and ineffective. How much money is it?
The amount of money spent on so called "renewable energy" since 2015 is 4.12 trillion dollars, compared to 377 billion dollars spent on nuclear energy, much of the latter to prevent the willful and deadly destruction of existing nuclear infrastructure.
IEA overview, Energy Investments.
The graphic is interactive at the link; one can calculate overall expenditures on what the IEA dubiously calls "clean energy," ignoring the fact that the expenditure on so called "renewable energy" is basically a front for maintaining the growing use of fossil fuels.
Things are getting worse faster.
People lie, to each other and to themselves, but numbers don't lie.
I fully expect our nominee, VP Harris, to have profited by her exposure to what I regard as the most important climate policy of the best Presidential Administration of my lifetime: The embrace of nuclear energy.
The Biden administration has rightly described itself as promoting "the largest sustained push to accelerate civil nuclear deployment in the United States in nearly five decades."
White House holds summit on US nuclear energy deployment
My strong opinion that nuclear energy is the last best hope of the planet is not subject to change by appeals to clap trap about so called "nuclear waste," Fukushima, Chernobyl (and even more silly) Three Mile Island, blah, blah, blah...
I suggest finding someone more credulous than I to whom to chant endlessly about these points. I'm far more concerned with the collapse of the planetary atmosphere than I am with the fear that someone somewhere at sometime may die from an industrial accident involving radiation. Let me repeat: I am far more concerned with the vast death toll, extreme environmental destruction, and the global heating associated with the normal use of dangerous fossil fuels. I am pleased to note that history will record that Joe Biden was a leader in doing something about this, perhaps less than would have been desirable in a sensible world, but at least he thought anew.
In any case I am certainly prone to thank our current President for his hard work to press for the expansion of nuclear energy, since very clearly we are out of time. I look forward to a Harris administration embracing this important legacy of President Biden.
When our country, as precious as it has been to us, is an ancient memory, the rot we left behind in the planetary atmosphere will still persist. I am pleased, to repeat, as it cannot be repeated enough, to note that history will record that Joe Biden was a leader in doing something.
As for the rest of us, history will not forgive us, nor should it.