Yes, you are correct. But regarding item 3, a derivative of the rate of CO2 level change, if the car is decelerating isn't the linear graph should become straight or start curving down? So lets say very roughly:
Graph y=x*2 is curving up, so rate of change is accelerating.
Graph y=const*x is linear and rate of change is constant.
Graph y=sqrt(x) is curving down, so rate change is decelerating.
In this case the graph curving up but YOY numbers tell us that it should curve down.
I've found daily numbers from Mauna Kea. If we take max and min levels for past years:
2023 - MAX=424.63, MIN=417.34
2022 - MAX=421.69, MIN=414.00
2021 - MAX=420.29, MIN=409.65
2020 - MAX=417.97, MIN=410.34
Admittedly it is not scientific measurement, but as a rough estimation it does look like 2022 to 2023 is higher than previous. And looking at the complete graph it is visible that the bulk of measures curves ever so slightly up, meaning positive acceleration of rate.
PS: I don't pretend to know more than data scientists of course. I'm just concerned that this emissions estimations are a perfect storm to produce misleading data. Because a) it is hard to estimate as an emissions, b) both pro-change and contra-change parties have financial incentive to produce numbers that show that emissions are lowering even if it is not a reality.
>Yes, you are correct. But regarding item 3, a derivative of the rate of CO2 level change, if the car is decelerating isn't the linear graph should become straight or start curving down? So lets say very roughly:
The car is holding speed or slightly slowing, but we are still getting further from home every day.
Constant co2 emission would make atmospheric levels look like straight line with a constant slope upwards.
Decreasing but positive Co2 emission would make atmospheric levels look like a line going up that gradually flattens out to a constant level.
It is only when you have negative acceleration that the atmospheric level line curves down. This would mean we are sucking more CO2 out than we are putting in. This would mean that the car is not only going slower, but we are now in reverse, and getting closer to home.
Graph y=x*2 is curving up, so rate of change is accelerating.
Graph y=const*x is linear and rate of change is constant.
Graph y=sqrt(x) is curving down, so rate change is decelerating.
In this case the graph curving up but YOY numbers tell us that it should curve down.
I've found daily numbers from Mauna Kea. If we take max and min levels for past years:
2023 - MAX=424.63, MIN=417.34
2022 - MAX=421.69, MIN=414.00
2021 - MAX=420.29, MIN=409.65
2020 - MAX=417.97, MIN=410.34
Admittedly it is not scientific measurement, but as a rough estimation it does look like 2022 to 2023 is higher than previous. And looking at the complete graph it is visible that the bulk of measures curves ever so slightly up, meaning positive acceleration of rate.
PS: I don't pretend to know more than data scientists of course. I'm just concerned that this emissions estimations are a perfect storm to produce misleading data. Because a) it is hard to estimate as an emissions, b) both pro-change and contra-change parties have financial incentive to produce numbers that show that emissions are lowering even if it is not a reality.