Comment by zipping1549

Comment by zipping1549 6 months ago

7 replies

I skimmed the original article and it only mentions the graph and says that it's "comparable to DC powered unit". I'm guessing < 100ppm difference is somewhat acceptable?

dfex 6 months ago

You might be right - it's just odd that it's always showing "more" rather than similar amounts.

Also, according to Claude[1] a 50ppm difference is equivalent to around 25 years current atmospheric carbon increase.

* Pre-industrial (1700s): ~280 ppm

* 1958 (when systematic measurements began): ~315 ppm

* 2000: ~370 ppm

* 2015: ~400 ppm (milestone crossed)

* Current: ~420-425 ppm

[1] "What is the normal range for background CO2 concentrations in the air?"

  • strogonoff 6 months ago

    It’s crazy to think that many people alive today experienced a 30% increase in ambient atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration within their lifetimes.

  • devmor 6 months ago

    You’re missing some deeply important context there, which is that those measurements are for outdoor atmospheric CO2 only.

    Average indoor air quality ranges from 400-1000 ppm CO2, with adverse mental effects starting to appear close to 2000 ppm.

    In that context, you can see why a 50 ppm difference is marginal. This is why asking an LLM is not generally a great idea for understanding something - you need to follow it up with more research.

  • freeone3000 6 months ago

    Not odd at all that it’s always showing more — sensor error is often biased. This is within the listed range though.

  • officeplant 6 months ago

    I have to know, what's the the rise of people like you chiming in with AI sourced tidbits? It's like the people with no knowledge on a subject that use google as a quick catch up tool so they can participate in a conversation, but somehow even worse. Are they the same people, but now lazier or just true believers in the non-sense engines?