The rise in carbon dioxide emissions over the past 100 years has had devastating consequences. With global temperatures rising and the pace of Arctic ice melting accelerating, there is no doubt that our planet's climate is indeed changing. But it seems that this is not the only influence of greenhouse gases, because there is a global greening of the planet. However, the authors of the new study note that the harm from CO 2 far outweighs the benefit.

Why is there a global greening of our planet?

A new study on climate change found a significant increase in tree and plant growth. Scientists concluded that this was due to an increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Using data from NASA and satellite sensors, an international team of 32 researchers discovered how the amount of greenery on the planet has increased over the past 33 years - from 25 to 50% of vegetation showed significant growth.

This means that all these plants can cover 32% of our planet. The dramatic increase in greenhouse gases since the industrial revolution has led to the fact that the volume of plants has increased. However, the increase in the amount of CO 2 in the atmosphere of our planet is not enough to fully explain the greening effect that scientists observe around the world. Using computer models, scientists have calculated that the greenhouse gas only affects this phenomenon by 70%. This means there are other factors as well. Increases in atmospheric nitrogen account for 9% of the increase, climate change about 8%, and land-use change about 4%.

What does global greening do us good or bad?

Undoubtedly, this study was immediately seized by many skeptics who argue that the increase in the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has a positive effect on the planet due to the increase in the amount of vegetation. However, the researchers say this effect diminishes over time as plants acclimate to higher CO 2 concentrations but are limited in water and nutrients. But there are obviously other consequences of increased greenhouse gas emissions.

Other effects of carbon dioxide emissions

First, many of the negative aspects of climate change, namely global warming, sea level rise, melting glaciers and sea ice, and more severe tropical storms, have not yet been recognized. Secondly, studies have shown that plants acclimate to increased CO2 concentrations and the greening effect diminishes over time.

Many would argue that plants will not be able to absorb carbon dioxide, which is increasing. But this possibility was taken into account by scientists when creating their models. While CO 2 is by far the most well-known greenhouse gas, it is not the only one we should be worried about. The warming climate in the northern hemisphere has already started to melt permafrost, releasing huge amounts of methane that plants are unlikely to be able to cope with.

The problem of exceeding the content of carbon dioxide in indoor air is being discussed more and more often in the last 20 years. New research comes out and new data is published. Are the building codes for the buildings we live and work in keeping up with them?

A person's well-being and performance are closely related to the quality of the air where he works and rests. And air quality can be determined by the concentration of carbon dioxide CO2.

Why exactly CO2?

• This gas is everywhere where people are.
• The concentration of carbon dioxide in a room directly depends on the processes of human life - after all, we exhale it.
• Excess levels of carbon dioxide are harmful to the state of the human body, therefore, it must be monitored.
• An increase in CO2 concentration clearly indicates problems with ventilation.
• The poorer the ventilation, the more pollutants are concentrated in the air. Therefore, an increase in indoor carbon dioxide is a sign that air quality is declining.

In recent years, proposals have been appearing in the professional communities of doctors and building designers to revise the methodology for determining air quality and expand the list of measured substances. But so far nothing clearer has been found about the change in CO2 levels.

How do you know if indoor carbon dioxide levels are acceptable? Experts offer lists of standards, and they will be different for buildings of different purposes.

Residential carbon dioxide standards

Designers of apartment buildings and private houses use GOST 30494-2011 under the title “Residential and public buildings. Indoor microclimate parameters ". This document considers the level of CO2 optimal for human health to be 800 - 1,000 ppm. A mark at the level of 1,400 ppm is the limit of the permissible content of carbon dioxide in the room. If there is more, then the air quality is considered poor.

However, already 1,000 ppm is not recognized as a normal variant by a number of studies devoted to the dependence of the body's state on the level of CO2. Their data indicate that at around 1,000 ppm, more than half of the subjects feel a deterioration in the microclimate: increased heart rate, headache, fatigue and, of course, the notorious "nothing to breathe".

Physiologists consider 600 - 800 ppm as a normal level of CO2.

Although some isolated complaints of stuffiness are possible at the indicated concentration.

It turns out that building standards for the level of CO2 contradict the conclusions of physiologists. In recent years, it is from the latter that the calls to renew the permissible limits have been heard more and more loudly, but so far the calls have not gone further. The lower the CO2 norm, which the builders are guided by, the cheaper it costs. And those who have to solve the problem of ventilation of the apartment on their own pay the price for this.

Carbon dioxide standards in schools

The more carbon dioxide there is in the air, the harder it is to focus and cope with the workload. Knowing this, US authorities recommend that schools maintain CO2 levels below 600 ppm. In Russia, the mark is slightly higher: the already mentioned GOST considers 800 ppm or less optimal for children's institutions. However, in practice, not only the American but also the Russian recommended level is a dream come true for most schools.

One of ours showed that for more than half of the study time, the amount of carbon dioxide in the air exceeds 1,500 ppm, and sometimes approaches 2,500 ppm! In such conditions it is impossible to concentrate, the ability to perceive information is critically reduced. Other likely symptoms of excess CO2 include hyperventilation, sweating, eye inflammation, nasal congestion, and difficulty breathing.

Why it happens? The offices are rarely ventilated, because an open window means cold children and noise from the street. Even if the school building has powerful central ventilation, it is usually either noisy or outdated. But the windows in most schools are modern - plastic, sealed, airtight. With a class of 25 people in an office with an area of ​​50-60 m2 with a closed window, carbon dioxide in the air jumps by 800 ppm in just half an hour.

Carbon dioxide standards in offices

In offices, the same problems are observed as in schools: the increased concentration of CO2 makes it difficult to concentrate. Errors multiply and labor productivity drops.

The standards for the content of carbon dioxide in the air for offices are generally the same as for apartments and houses: 800 - 1,400 ppm is considered acceptable. However, as we have already found out, already 1,000 ppm causes discomfort to every second person.

Unfortunately, in many offices the problem is not solved in any way. Somewhere they just don't know anything about her, somewhere the management deliberately ignores her, and somewhere they try to solve it with the help of an air conditioner. A jet of cool air really creates a short-term illusion of comfort, but carbon dioxide does not disappear anywhere and continues to do its "dirty deed".

It may also be the case that the office space was built in compliance with all standards, but it is operated with violations. For example, the density of staff is too high. According to building rules, one person should have from 4 to 6.5 m2 of area. If there are more employees, then carbon dioxide accumulates in the air faster.

Conclusions and outputs

The problem with ventilation is most acute in apartments, office buildings and childcare facilities.
There are two reasons for this:

1. Discrepancy between building codes and hygiene guidelines.
The former say: no more than 1,400 ppm CO2, the latter warn: this is too much.

CO2 concentration (ppm)	Building codes (according to GOST 30494-2011)	Influence on the body (according to sanitary and hygienic research)
less than 800	High quality air	Perfect well-being and vigor
800 – 1 000	Medium quality air	At 1,000 ppm, every second person feels stuffiness, lethargy, decreased concentration, headache
1 000 - 1 400	The lower limit of the permissible norm	Lethargy, problems with attention and information processing, heavy breathing, problems with the nasopharynx
Above 1,400	Poor quality air	Severe fatigue, lack of initiative, inability to concentrate, dry mucous membranes, trouble sleeping

2. Failure to comply with standards for the construction, reconstruction or operation of the building.
The simplest example is the installation of plastic windows that do not allow the outside air to pass through and thereby exacerbate the situation with the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the room.

Very large. Carbon dioxide takes part in the formation of all living matter on the planet and, together with water and methane molecules, creates the so-called "greenhouse (greenhouse) effect".

The role of carbon dioxide ( CO 2, dioxide or carbon dioxide) in the life of the biosphere consists primarily in maintaining the process of photosynthesis, which is carried out by plants.

Being greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide in the air affects the heat exchange between the planet and the surrounding space, effectively blocking re-radiated heat at a number of frequencies, and thus participates in the formation of the planet's climate.

Recently, there has been an increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the air, which leads to a change in the Earth's climate.

Carbon (C) in the atmosphere is contained mainly in the form of carbon dioxide (CO 2) and in small amounts in the form of methane (CH 4), carbon monoxide and other hydrocarbons.

For gases of the Earth's atmosphere, the term "gas lifetime" is used. This is the time during which the gas is completely renewed, i.e. the time during which the same amount of gas enters the atmosphere as it contains. So, for carbon dioxide this time is 3-5 years, for methane - 10-14 years. CO is oxidized to CO 2 within a few months.

In the biosphere, the value of carbon is very high, since it is part of all living organisms. Within living beings, carbon is contained in a reduced form, and outside the biosphere - in an oxidized one. Thus, a life cycle chemical exchange is formed: СО 2 ↔ living matter.

Sources of carbon in the Earth's atmosphere.

The primary source of carbon dioxide is volcanoes, during the eruption of which a huge amount of gases are released into the atmosphere. Part of this carbon dioxide arises from the thermal decomposition of ancient limestones in various zones of metamorphism.

Carbon also enters the Earth's atmosphere in the form of methane as a result of the anaerobic decomposition of organic residues. Methane under the influence of oxygen is rapidly oxidized to carbon dioxide. The main suppliers of methane to the atmosphere are tropical forests and swamps.

CO 2 migration in the biosphere.

CO 2 migration proceeds in two ways:

In the first method, CO 2 is absorbed from the Earth's atmosphere during photosynthesis and participates in the formation of organic substances with subsequent burial in the earth's crust in the form of minerals: peat, oil, oil shale.

In the second method, carbon participates in the creation of carbonates in the hydrosphere. CO 2 goes into H 2 CO 3, HCO 3 -1, CO 3 -2. Then, with the participation of calcium (less often magnesium and iron), the precipitation of carbonates occurs in a biogenic and abiogenic way. Thick strata of limestone and dolomite appear. According to A.B. Ronov, the ratio of organic carbon (Corg) to carbonate carbon (Ccarb) in the history of the biosphere was 1: 4.

Geochemical carbon cycle.

Extraction of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Carbon dioxide from the Earth's atmosphere is extracted by green plants through the process of photosynthesis, which is carried out by the pigment chlorophyll, which uses energy solar radiation... Plants convert carbon dioxide obtained from the atmosphere into carbohydrates and oxygen. Carbohydrates are involved in the formation of organic compounds in plants, and oxygen is released back into the atmosphere.

Binding of carbon dioxide.

A very small part of its total mass is involved in the active carbon cycle. A huge amount of carbonic acid is preserved in the form of fossil limestones and other rocks. In turn, there is a moving equilibrium between the carbon dioxide of the Earth's atmosphere and the water of the ocean.

Due to the high reproduction rate, plant organisms (especially lower microorganisms and marine phytoplankton) produce about 1.5-10 11 tons of carbon in the form of organic matter per year, which corresponds to 5.86-10 20 J (1.4-10 20 cal) of energy ...

Plants are partially eaten by animals, when they die off, organic matter is deposited in the form of sapropel, humus, peat, which, in turn, give rise to many other caustobiolites - coal, oil, combustible gases.

In the processes of decomposition of organic substances, their mineralization, bacteria (for example, putrefactive), as well as many fungi (for example, mold) play a huge role.

The main reserves of carbon are in a bound state (mainly in the composition of carbonates) in the sedimentary rocks of the Earth, a significant part is dissolved in the waters of the ocean, and a relatively small part is present in the air.

The ratio of the amounts of carbon in the lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere of the Earth, according to updated calculations, is 28 570: 57: 1.

How does carbon dioxide get back into the Earth's atmosphere?

Carbon dioxide is released into the Earth's atmosphere:

In the process of breathing of living organisms and the decomposition of their corpses, the decay of carbonates, the processes of fermentation, decay and combustion;

Green plants, absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere during photosynthesis during the day, return some of it back at night;

As a result of the activity of volcanoes, whose gases consist mainly of carbon dioxide and water vapor. Modern volcanism, on average, leads to the release of 2 · 10 8 tons of CO 2 per year, which is less than 1% of the anthropogenic emissions (released by human activity);

As a result of human industrial activity, which in recent years has taken a special place in the carbon cycle. The massive combustion of fossil fuels leads to an increase in the carbon content in the atmosphere, since only 57% of the carbon dioxide produced by mankind is processed by plants and absorbed by the hydrosphere. Massive deforestation also leads to an increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the air.

Very large. Carbon dioxide takes part in the formation of all living matter on the planet and, together with water and methane molecules, creates the so-called "greenhouse (greenhouse) effect".

Carbon dioxide value ( CO 2, dioxide or carbon dioxide) in the life of the biosphere consists primarily in maintaining the process of photosynthesis, which is carried out by plants.

Being greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide in the air affects the heat exchange of the planet with the surrounding space, effectively blocking re-radiated heat at a number of frequencies, and thus participates in the formation.

Recently, there has been an increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the air, which leads to.

Carbon (C) in the atmosphere is contained mainly in the form of carbon dioxide (CO 2) and in small amounts in the form of methane (CH 4), carbon monoxide and other hydrocarbons.

For gases of the atmosphere, the term "gas lifetime" is used. This is the time during which the gas is completely renewed, i.e. the time during which the same amount of gas enters the atmosphere as it contains. So, for carbon dioxide this time is 3-5 years, for methane - 10-14 years. CO is oxidized to CO 2 within a few months.

In the biosphere, the value of carbon is very high, since it is part of all living organisms. Within living beings, carbon is contained in a reduced form, and outside the biosphere - in an oxidized one. Thus, a life cycle chemical exchange is formed: СО 2 ↔ living matter.

Sources of carbon in the atmosphere.

The source of primary carbon dioxide is, during the eruption of which a huge amount of gases are released into the atmosphere. Part of this carbon dioxide arises from the thermal decomposition of ancient limestones in various zones of metamorphism.

Carbon also enters the atmosphere in the form of methane as a result of the anaerobic decomposition of organic residues. Methane under the influence of oxygen is rapidly oxidized to carbon dioxide. The main suppliers of methane to the atmosphere are tropical forests and.

In turn, carbon dioxide of the atmosphere is a source of carbon for other geospheres - the biosphere, etc.

CO 2 migration in the biosphere.

CO 2 migration proceeds in two ways:

In the first method, CO 2 is absorbed from the atmosphere during photosynthesis and participates in the formation of organic substances with subsequent burial in the form of minerals: peat, oil, oil shale.

In the second method, carbon participates in the creation of carbonates in the hydrosphere. CO 2 goes into H 2 CO 3, HCO 3 -1, CO 3 -2. Then, with the participation of calcium (less often magnesium and iron), the precipitation of carbonates occurs in a biogenic and abiogenic way. Thick strata of limestone and dolomite appear. According to A.B. Ronov, the ratio of organic carbon (Corg) to carbonate carbon (Ccarb) in the history of the biosphere was 1: 4.

How is the geochemical circulation of carbon in nature and how carbon dioxide returns to the atmosphere

Image copyright AFP

The average level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of our planet in 2015 for the first time during observations reached a critical point of 400 parts per million, the World Meteorological Organization said.

The critical level of carbon dioxide was recorded by an air monitoring station located in Hawaii.

According to experts, the content of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will not fall below 400 parts per million throughout 2016, and possibly in the coming decades.

What does this mean for you and me?

Host of the "Fifth Floor" program AlexanderBaranov discusses the topic with the Director of the Climate and Energy Program of the World Wildlife Fund AlexeatKokorinth and a senior researcher at the Institute of Plant and Animal Ecology of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences EvgenieatZinovievth.

AlexanderBAranov:400 parts per million for an ordinary person who does not understand climate issues, but learned arithmetic at school, is very little. As little as 200, 100 or 500. Especially when it comes to colorless and odorless gas. Why were the scientists suddenly so alarmed?

Aleksey Kokorin: CO2 is one of the greenhouse gases, second only to water vapor, and the main gas that is influenced by humans in the atmosphere.

And the fact that a person does not influence the water vapor content does not greatly facilitate the matter, because the influence on the CO2 content is great, and isotope analysis proved that this CO2 is from fuel combustion. It's a lot.

The number is very small, but it is 30% more than 50-60 years ago. And before that, the level was constant for a long time, there are data from direct measurements.

A.B.: Scientists now agree that CO2 affects climate change and not vice versa? Some time ago, some scientists said that the rise in carbon dioxide emissions was influenced by the warming of the ocean. And humans, compared to the ocean, emit much less CO2 into the atmosphere. What is the current consensus on this?

A.K.: The consensus is almost complete. I mentioned isotope analysis because in the past, and this has also been proven, first the temperature changed, and then the CO2 concentration.

This was during the transition period between ice ages and on other occasions. The correlation was in the following sequence. Here the correlation goes in a different sequence. But most importantly, there is evidence of isotopic analysis. There is a consensus here.

EvgeniusZinoviev: I am not a climatologist, I am a paleontologist. At our institute, in the north, in the Arctic, we observe an increase in both the CO2 content, and this is shown by our colleagues dendrochronologists, and the accompanying changes are the advance of the forest border. We are monitoring the landscapes of the northern part of the West Siberian Plain and the Polar and Subpolar Urals, and over the past forty years the northern border of the forest has been shifting to the north.

It does not yet reach the boundaries that were in the climatic optimum of the Holocene, when the woody vegetation reached the middle Yamal, but the process is going in that direction and is indirectly associated with climate warming. Woody plants gradually occupy territories from which they once retreated.

The warming that we are now seeing is not the most significant, now it is not the warmest climate. I can compare with the recent geological past - the last 130-140 thousand years. This period is called the Mikulinsky interglacial, and then plants and heat-loving animals moved much further north than now.

In our time, according to objective data, such levels have not yet been reached. But that warming was very short-lived, only about 5 thousand years. Then it was replaced by a cooling, then warming again, and then a long cold period, the Zyryan glaciation, which was also divided into warmer and colder epochs, began. Then the Scandinavian ice sheet began to form.

A.B.: That isvAre you talking about a cold snap in the Medieval period?

E.Z.: You are talking about historical times, and I mean earlier borders. This is the late Pleistocene.

A.B.: And what conclusions should we, non-specialists, draw from this? Opponents of the theory of human-induced global warming say that we are simply in a certain cycle and that various fluctuations in CO2 concentration are associated with this.

Carbon dioxide is food for plants. In the process of photosynthesis, plants absorb carbon dioxide, release oxygen into the atmosphere, and the higher the carbon dioxide content, the more actively the plants begin to consume it and the faster they grow.

E.Z.: The development of woody vegetation is not observed, on the contrary. In North America and southern Europe, forests are on fire, forest vegetation is degrading, aridization and drying of the climate are taking place. The lungs of the planet are shrinking.

A.B.: Why is this happening? In theory, they should expand?

E.Z.: Climate is a multi-vector system; there may be different factors that we cannot always take into account. There is a point of view that glaciers will begin to melt, which is associated with climate warming, and this is happening.

The Greenland ice sheet is also degrading, and in the Arctic, the large amount of fresh water released can change the direction of the Gulf Stream. Then this stove for Europe will stop heating the north of Europe, and the formation of glaciers will begin there again. It will be very bad.

A sharp warming can give rise to a sharp cooling. The ice cap accumulates water, and the climate begins to dry out. Solid forests disappear, sparse forests are formed. The climate becomes dry, cold, continental, and it becomes so not only in Siberia, but also in Europe.

Everything is very complex and interconnected. I would not oversimplify this, it is necessary to take into account the modern factor - the increase in CO2 emissions associated with industrial human activities, with the presence of a large number of industries, machines, and so on - you cannot argue with that. Especially in large metropolitan areas where large industries are concentrated.

But another question is what consequences this will have. Humanity is accustomed to living in certain comfortable conditions. If the increase or decrease in the level of the world ocean begins, then catastrophes will begin. They can be provoked by anthropogenic impact. Humanity is not so small as not to influence the natural environment. It has become a geological factor, not just a biological one, it changes more fundamental things in the biosphere, in the earth's crust.

A.B.: Let's say humanity can reduce CO2 emissions. But this is just one of the factors, and not the biggest. Can this change something, lead to some kind of dramatic improvement in the situation?

A.K.: It is very important, from the point of view of the physics of the atmosphere and the ocean, to understand what is happening. Two processes take place: this is the process of natural climate variability - the sun, most clearly, complex periodic processes in the ocean, Atlantic, Pacific.

There are also more studied things - heat flows from the atmosphere to the ocean and back, which are cyclical. These cyclical processes are superimposed on a constant impact, which is linear in nature.

Over the 21st century, temperatures are expected to rise by two degrees at best, but in reality - by three or three and a half. And at the same time, cooling and warming will occur cyclically, and warming - much faster. And it is not at all obvious that the increase in the number of hazardous hydrological phenomena will decrease with decreasing temperature.

A.B.: It is very difficult to understand for a person who does not deal with this problem and mainly watches popular science programs, where these issues are primitivized, simplified, but simple arguments act on the mind of an ordinary person who looks at it from the outside.

When he is given a graph of the temperature change inXXcentury and they say: look, while man did not particularly affect the atmosphere, the temperature rose, and when he began to influence, when industrialization was more powerful after 1940 until 1970, when the situation should have worsened, we observed a cooling.

On the basis of such graphs, people say that a person does not really influence, there are some more powerful factors that are beyond our control. Therefore, talk about the role of humans in global warming is a myth behind those who benefit from it.

E.Z.: The cumulative effect starts to work, the human impact is increasing. At some stage, it may not appear, but then, as the concentration of CO2 and greenhouse gases increases, sooner or later it manifests itself practically throughout the entire globe. Both in developed areas and in the north, in the Arctic.

The anthropogenic factor is superimposed on the astronomical factors associated with the orbit of the Earth's motion, the cyclicity is strongly manifested, and so on. And when everything is superimposed on each other, completely unpredictable events can occur.

And the anthropogenic impact will continue to increase, even if restrictions on production are introduced and so on. A lot of cars are produced that pollute the atmosphere very much. And other factors. They won't go anywhere.

And herbaceous and woody vegetation does not increase, but, on the contrary, degradation of the forest cover occurs.

A.B.: But we also saw reports of a different kind, that in Brazil suddenly the Amazon forests began to grow.

E.Z.: It is, but you look what is going on in America? Southwest California? There are massive forest fires. It takes time for the forest to recover after a fire. After a fire, several years pass before the forest begins to grow. And where it's dry, it just stops growing. The forest turns into a steppe, a desert, and so on.

A.B.: These are serious factors, but for the everyday consciousness it is difficult to combine this with his own activity. One can adhere to the theory that human activity is the last straw that can outweigh the ecological balance against the background of more serious factors. But when they say that there is such a factor as spots on the Sun, the activation of the Sun, which is a powerful source of energy, in comparison with which all our activities are a trifle, it is even impossible to compare.

Thatthe graphs show - when the Sun is active, the temperature rises, and when it is less active, it goes down, all this is correlated. Then they say that it all depends on what orbit the Earth is moving in. If the orbit is elliptical, it gets colder. And when all this is said to a person, he thinks: what, compared to such cosmic phenomena, are our unfortunate emissions into the atmosphere. How can you convince a person that by our actions we can upset this balance?

E.Z.: We need to somehow convince, because this really is not the last factor. For example, forests burn without a person - dry thunderstorms and so on. But human activity contributes to this. Everyone should start with himself. People should understand that a lot depends on them.

One person can say: I will do what I think is necessary, all the same, nothing depends on me. But there are millions of people, and if everyone thinks so, it won't be any better. The inertia of human thinking exists, unfortunately.

A.B.: How to convince a person that his car, in which he will drive the extrafivekilometers, also affects the climate, even against the background of the fact that the Earth is in an elliptical orbit, and not on some other?

A.K.: Russian climatologists, and not only Russian ones, wondered how to demonstrate this clearly. Probable reactions of the Sun in 15-20 years will most likely reduce the temperature on the globe by about 0.25 degrees. And the anthropogenic impact - at least two degrees. It was the same in the 30-40s of the twentieth century.

And another characteristic thing is this: both the stratosphere and the troposphere are warming up. That is, you have, as it were, a greenhouse film, and if it is heated above the film and under the film, it means that the light bulb has become warmer. And if it heats up under the film, and gets colder above the film, it means that the film has become thicker. You can try to explain it somehow so clearly.

A.B.: Do you admit the likelihood that we are really between two ice ages and something will happen and a cooling will begin on the Earth?

E.Z.: Your question suggests that my colleague and I speak poorly. Of course, we are between two ice ages, the one that ended about 300 thousand years ago, and the one that will begin in a few thousand years - maybe 20, maybe 100. My colleague as a climatologist knows better about this. But it will be absolutely certain. We are talking about a different time scale. On this scale, the human influence on global warming cannot be considered, it is hundreds of thousands of years.

A.B.: That is, we can not live up to this cold snap?

E.Z.: Unfortunately, we will definitely not live to see a global cold snap, even from our great-grandchildren no one will survive. Will there be periods of cold snap during the 21st century? Yes, they probably will. We live in an era of superposition of various variations, including solar ones, on the global trend.

_____________________________________________________________

You can download the podcast of the program "The Fifth Floor" .