Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-lrvh5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-25T09:11:19.956Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Reconstructing past atmospheric CO2 concentration based on ice-core analyses: open questions due to in situ production of CO2 in the ice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2017

Jürg Tschumi
Affiliation:
Climate and Environmental Physics, Physics Institute, University of Bern, Sidlerstrasse 5, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland
Bernhard Stauffer
Affiliation:
Climate and Environmental Physics, Physics Institute, University of Bern, Sidlerstrasse 5, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Analysis of air extracted from bubbles of polar ice showed the anthropogenic increase of atmospheric CO2 concentration during the past few hundred years (preindustrial concentration 280 ppmv) and, unexpectedly, that the concentration also increased due to natural causes from 200 to 280 ppmv during the transition from the last glacial epoch to the Holocene. However, more detailed reconstructions based on ice-core analyses suggested that some of the additional observed variations were actually due to the modification of CO2 concentration in the bubbles by chemical reactions between impurities in the ice. Detailed analyses of acidity, the carbonate concentration, the concentration of oxidation agents like hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), and organic compounds (e.g. formaldehyde (HCHO)) along short intervals of ice cores, representing only a few annual layers, allowed us to investigate these chemical reactions. The records are not conclusive but they indicate that the oxidation of organic compounds is at least as important as acid–carbonate reactions. Ice containing a low mean carbonate and a low H2O2 concentration, as well as a small scattering of CO2 results obtained on several adjacent samples representing a few annual layers at most, is at present the best guarantee for reliable results of the atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 2000
Figure 0

Table 1. Estimated mean concentrations of typical compounds containing carbon, H2O2 and H+

Figure 1

Fig. 1. CO2, H2O2, HCHO, Ca+ and H+ concentrations along a section of the GRIP ice core, representing about two annual layers. Concentrations are given in μmol kg−1 ice. The proton concentration is calculated based on ECMs (Hammer, 1980) (dashed line, left scale); the solid line shows the electrical conductivity of the meltwater (right scale). The CO2 concentration is given in ppmv (right scale) and the deviation from 282 ppmv in μmol kg−1 ice (left scale) assuming that the air content of the ice is 90 cm3 kg−1 ice.

Figure 2

Fig. 2. CO2, H2O2, HCHO, Ca+ and H+ concentrations along a section of the GRIP ice core, representing about three annual layers. Concentrations are given in μmol kg−1 ice. The proton concentration is calculated based on ECMs (dashed line, left scale); the solid line shows the electrical conductivity of the meltwater (right scale). The CO2 concentration is given in ppmv (right scale) and the deviation from 278 ppmv in μmol kg−1 ice (left scale). The missing part is due to a break in the core.

Figure 3

Fig. 3. CO2, carbonate, H2O2, HCHO, Ca+ and H+ concentrations along a section of the GRIP ice core, representing a little less than two annual layers. Concentrations are given in μmol kg−1 ice. The proton concentration is calculated based on ECMs. The CO2 concentration is given in ppmv (right scale), and the deviation from 277 ppmv in μmol kg−1 ice (left scale).

Figure 4

Fig. 4. CO2, H2O2, HCHO, Ca+ and H+ concentrations along a section of the GRIP ice core, representing about four annual layers. Concentrations are given in μmol kg−1 ice. The proton concentration is calculated based on ECMs (dashed line, left scale). The solid line shows the electrical conductivity of the meltwater (right scale). The CO2 concentration is given in ppmv (right scale), and the deviation from 260 ppmv in μmol kg−1 ice (left scale).

Figure 5

Fig. 5. CO2, carbonate, H2O2, HCHO, Ca+ and H+ concentrations along a section of the GRIP ice core, representing about ten annual layers. Concentrations are given in μmol kg−1 ice. The proton concentration is calculated based on ECMs. The CO2 concentration is given in ppmv (right scale), and the deviation from 245 ppmv in μmol kg−1 ice (left scale).

Figure 6

Fig. 6. CO2, H2O2, HCHO, Ca+ and H+ concentrations along a section of an ice core from Byrd station, representing about five annual layers. Concentrations are given in μmol kg−1 ice. No detailed ECMs are available for this core section. The solid line shows the electrical conductivity of the meltwater (right scale). The proton concentration was calculated from the meltwater conductivity assuming that only H+ is contributing to the electrical conductivity. The CO2 concentration is given in ppmv (right scale), and the deviation from 268 ppmv in μmol kg−1 ice (left scale).

Figure 7

Table 2. Correlation coefficients between measured CO2 concentrations and several compounds measured in parallel along short ice-core sections

Figure 8

Fig. 7. (a) Increase with time in the probability that uniformly distributed material in the ice will contact a grain boundary due to crystal growth F(t). After 1000 years about 82% of the material was in contact with a grain boundary. (b) Probability that an enclosure with radius rE = 5μm will contact a vein (triple junctions of grains) with radius rV = 0.4μm due to the movement of veins caused by crystal growth. After 3500 years, only about 0.6% of enclosures with radius rE have made contact with a vein.