Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by verve_rat | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

verve_rat·

So, assuming a straight line backwards, we have gotten 1% slower since 1970?

Doesn't sound great.

Edit: to prove my slowness I typo'd a zero into the number. It's 1%, not 10%.

View on HN

It's not a straight line, no. In 1970 it was around 320ppm, so not quite 100ppm less than today as opposed to 100-150ppm. So 0.3% slower, again if you take those performance numbers at face value which you probably should both, because they are the result of experiments that take place at levels of 1000ppm and beyond and it's unclear if they even apply to lower levels.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1091926/atmospheric-conc...

Today’s 422ppm (https://www.co2.earth/daily-co2) assumes you’re outside in a remote area with a light breeze to constantly get fresh air. Even just a city has higher levels and normal office space is sitting at 800ppm or so. A meeting room can break 1500ppm depending on occupants and ventilation, which is one of the reasons meetings suck and packed meetings suck more.

Thus a meeting where the PPM was ~1200ppm in 1970 with the same number of people in the same room in 2023 should be ~1300ppm.

Yeah, we're talking atmospheric CO2, hence: outside. I'm aware that indoor CO2 is higher, I've quoted the study.

I was pointing out that outdoor CO2 ppm vary significantly, and we are at ~420ppm not 410ppm which was quoted earlier.

Also, outdoor ppm increases indoor ppm which is within the range being studied so talking about cognitive decline from ongoing carbon emissions is supported.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com