More experiments that prove that CO2 is a coolant

Written by Geraint Hughes

Below is Geraint Hughes response to the comments re his earlier experiment demonstrating that CO2 is not a coolant shown here

 

  I said I would do more tests, with thermometers and other gases and such like and I will, of course, do more like I said, involving a bigger tower  I have performed 2 sets of tests comparing the temperature differences between using my Portable Vacuum Chamber device.

Here are the results of the test in table form.

40 Watt Squirrel Cage Vintage Tungsten
Time Difference (Seconds) for 10 Deg Change
Test 1 (0.5 Bar Gas Pressure)RTStart30 C°40 C°50 C°60 C°Max C° (20 Mins)
Vacuum24.937.2n / an / a11719969.1
Argon26.229n / a10515536765.5
Argon Differential with vacuumn / an / a-38.00 -168.00 -3.60 
Co226.128.1n / a10417744363.3
CO2 Differential with vacuumn / an / a-60.00 -642.00 -5.80 
40 Watt Spiral Vintage Tungsten
Time Difference (Seconds) for 10 Deg Change
Test 2 (0.6 Bar Gas Pressure)RTStart30 C°40 C°50 C°60 C°Max C° (20 Mins)
Vacuum22.724.9n / a13318140263.6
Argon23.131.3n / an / a19767260.2
Argon Differential with vacuumn / an / a-16.00 -270.00 -3.40 
Co22326n / a154247n / a59.2
CO2 Differential with vacuumn / a-21.00 -66.00 #VALUE!-4.40 

To help understand the tables RT (Room Temperature) indicates the temperature which a free-standing digital temperature probe indicated the temperature was in the room.  The starting temperature was the temperature indicated on the digital probe inside the vacuum chamber as I activated the light.  This probe touches the side of the bulb with the tip resting against the inside of the chamber.   This is not perfect and in due course, I will get better thermometers but this is sufficient to show that the concept of gaseous back radiant induced heating just doesn’t work.

In each instance the chamber was evacuated first, pressurized and then the light activated.

In the first test I used a Vintage Squirrel Cage bulb and pressurized the gases to 0.5 Bar.  In the second test I used a Spiral Vintage Bulb and pressurized the gases to 0.6 Bar.  The result is similar in both instances.  (My squirrel cage bulb, blew ☹)

You can see here that in both tests, the Bulb and container surface temperatures were cooler than in the Vacuum than with CO2 added.  In the first test after 20 minutes, the Vacuum achieved a maximum temperature of 69.1 and in the second test 63.6.  Co2, on the other hand, achieved a maximum temperature of 63.3 and 59.2, which was amazingly, COOLER!

Not only that, but the surface temperature rise was slower, going from 40 to 50 deg took 117 seconds in the first test and 181 seconds in the second test whereas CO2 took 177 Seconds and 247 Seconds respectively.  Wait a minute, I thought CO2 was an insulator!!!!!!  What the heck???????

I am always being told that CO2 not only increases maximum temperatures but causes faster temperature rises, due to the so-called “Reduction in the rate of cooling.” Because the so-called back radiance causes a radiant heat input.  Because CO2 supposedly acts as a layer of insulation.  IT DOES NOT.  It is a medium enabling greater heat transfer away from the warmed surface.

CO2 was never warmer, nor did it warm faster than the pure vacuum.  Its presence acted to cool the surface of the bulb.  DID YOU ACTUALLY EXPECT ANYTHING ELSE?

We are constantly being told that if we had earth in space with no atmosphere or a purely neutral atmosphere, it would experience an average GMST of 255K, but it is actually 288k, due to the presence of greenhouse gases.   This is untrue.

This experiment quickly shows such a theory to be completely stupid.  The addition of CO2 gas had no warming effect, only a cooling.  And when I compared Argon to CO2 I found that Argon, resulted in warmer conditions and faster temperature rises than CO2, despite the fact that Argon is not a “Greenhouse Gas.” History shows that the  Greenhouse Gas hypothesis is an unproven myth. Therefore it is actually fake and misleading terminology.  

Conclusion.

CO2 does not result in higher GMST  when compared to a Vacuum or Argon, yet we are being told that it does and it does so because of back radiant greenhouse effect, which is clearly complete rubbish.  Climate Crisis is a lie and this can be demonstrated in a growing number of ways.  

The links to the playlist of the tests can be found here.

Test 1 Playlist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KL_aKmZr4Ac&list=PLF66zq1SOYiveU3cw2KrcOPHQaX0CI6TR

Test 2 Playlist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaxfldJAXY0&list=PLF66zq1SOYitkLVH3VxVsaaT476khpcGR

The time stamps for the temperatures are as below.

1st Set of Temperature Tests (Squirrel Cage)

Vacuum. Room Temperature 24.9. Start Temperature on Container 30 Degree.

Vacuum – 40 Degrees – 25 Seconds.

Vacuum – 50 Degrees – 2 min 22 Seconds. = 142 Seconds. = 117 Seconds Difference.

Vacuum – 60 Degrees – 5 min 41 Seconds. = 341 Seconds. = 199 Seconds Difference.

Vacuum – 69.1 – 20 minutes.

Vacuum – 72.2 Degrees – Maximum after 40 minutes.

CO 2 – Room Temperature – 26.1. Start Temperature on Container Thermometer 28.1.

CO 2 – 30 Deg – 1 min 20 seconds. = 80 Seconds.

CO 2 – 40 Deg – 3 min 4 Seconds = 184 Seconds. = 104 Seconds Difference.

CO 2 – 50 Deg – 6 min 1 Seconds = 361 Seconds. = 177 Seconds Difference.

CO 2 – 60 Deg – 13 min 24 Seconds = 804 Seconds. = 443 Seconds Difference.

CO 2 – 63.3 Deg – 20 minutes.

CO 2 – 69 Deg – Maximum after 40 minutes.

Argon – Room Temperature – 26.2.  Start Temperature on Container Thermometer 29.0

Argon – 30 Deg – 1 min 10 Seconds. = 70 Seconds.

Argon – 40 Deg – 2 min 55 Seconds. = 175 Seconds. = 105 Seconds Difference.

Argon – 50 Deg – 5 min 30 Seconds. = 330 Seconds. = 155 Seconds Difference.

Argon – 60 Deg – 11 min 37 Seconds. = 697 Seconds. = 367 Seconds Difference.

Argon – 65.5 Deg – 20 minutes.

Argon – 70.3 Deg – Maximum after 40 minutes.

2nd Set of Temperature Tests – (Spiral Bulb)

Vacuum – 22.7 Room Temperature. 24.9 Start Temperature on Container Degree.

Vacuum – 30 Degrees – 2 min 31 = 151 Seconds

Vacuum – 40 Degrees – 4 min 44 Seconds = 284 Seconds = 133 Seconds Difference

Vacuum – 50 Degrees – 7 min 45 Seconds. = 465 Seconds = 181 Seconds Difference

Vacuum – 60 Degrees – 14 min 27 Seconds. = 867 Seconds = 402 Seconds Difference

Vacuum – 63.6 Degrees – 20 minutes

CO 2 – 23.0 Room Temperature – 26.0 Start Temperature on Container Thermometer.

CO 2 – 30 Deg – 2 min 34 seconds = 154 Seconds

CO 2 – 40 Deg – 4 min 58 Seconds = 298 Seconds = 144 Seconds Difference.

CO 2 – 50 Deg – 9 min 05 Seconds = 545 Seconds = 247 Seconds Difference.

CO 2 – 60 Deg –  not attained

CO 2 –  59.2 Deg – 20 minutes.

Argon – 23.1 Room Temperature – 31.3 Start Temperature on Container Thermometer 

Argon – 40 Deg – 3 min 51 Second = 231 Seconds

Argon – 50 Deg – 7 min 08 Seconds = 428 Seconds = 197 Seconds Difference.

Argon – 60 Deg – 18 min 20 Seconds = 1100 Seconds = 672 Seconds Difference.

Argon – 60.2 Deg – 20 minutes.

Comments (3)

  • Avatar

    Judy Ryan

    |

    Well stated Geraint. Let’s see what the critics say now

  • Avatar

    Judy Ryan

    |

    Hi Geraint, Someone commented to me that if you place your hand close to your cheek. You will notice in a few moments both the cheek and the side of the hand facing the cheek warm up (ie higher frequency IR). That is back radiation, in that particular thermodynamic system, warming each component to a higher temperature equilibrium. What is your answer to that?

  • Avatar

    Peter C

    |

    Hi Judy,

    I tried that little experiment. If the hand was cool (from holding a wine glass) my hand felt warmer.
    If my hand was warm or just normal, my cheek felt warmer.
    I did not notice both hand and cheek feeling warmer at the same time.

    Has anyone else tried this?

Comments are closed