Response to Stephen Schwartz et al.

Abstract

We thank Schwartz et al. for their significant comments. While we do recognize the reality of exchange of CO 2 among the atmosphere and reservoirs, it was not our intent to attempt to develop a model that considered these, nor do we believe this was necessary for our purposes. Our intent was to develop a useful model that incorporated the CO 2 molar concentration in 1750, C(0), its associated 14 C specific activity, S(0), the concentration value at t years past 1750, C(t), and its associated 14 C specific activity, S(t), for the purpose of quantifying the annual mean anthropogenic fossil-derived CO 2 in the atmosphere, C F (t). Pertinent exchanges between the atmosphere and CO 2 reservoirs produce results that are observed in the atmosphere. There have been claims that correlations between anthropogenic fossil-derived CO 2 and measurable statistics, including d 13 C and D14C, show that C F (t) constitutes most or all of the CO 2 that has been added to the atmosphere. We were not able to find any determination of the values of the anthropogenic fossil component, and this deficiency is what provided the impetus for our work.We began with a baseline assumption that the long-term preindustrial molar concentration was fixed and constant, changing significantly only as additional inputs to the atmosphere from possible natural and manmade sources later took place. Exchange among the reservoirs was inconsequential for our work, except for the possible residual effects of bomb

Update of the February 2022 CO2 Paper and Related Documents in Health Physics

“…The curve from our paper appears to be about 2 dpm(gC) -1 higher than their No bombs curve throughout the entire period. We admittedly recognized in our paper and in our response (Skrable et al 2022b) to their letter that our specific activities were likely elevated, which provided overestimates of the anthropogenic fossil component and underestimates of the non-fossil component of CO 2 . However, we did not recognize in our paper, based upon cited data from Wikipedia and NOAA, that our specific activities did not adequately consider the interference from 14 CO 2 from atmospheric nuclear bomb tests.…”

Components of CO2 in 1750 through 2018 Corrected for the Perturbation of the 14CO2 Bomb Spike

“…This letter relates to information in our paper (Skrable et al 2022) and to a letter that concludes our paper should be retracted from Health Physics in its entirety (Schwartz et al 2022). Our response to this letter counters those comments and conclusion.…”