"Estimates of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from volcanoes may have been significantly underestimated, according to new research by The University of Manchester.

Published in the journal, Science Advances, scientists have developed an advanced sensor that can detect volcanic gases with rapid speed and precision.

Using the sensor mounted on a helicopter, the research team measured emissions at Soufrière Hills Volcano on the Caribbean Island of Montserrat, revealing that the volcano emitted three times more CO2 than earlier studies had estimated.

Scientists typically monitor volcanic emissions by focusing on hot vents, known as fumaroles, which release high concentrations of easily detectable acid gases like sulphur dioxide (SO₂) and hydrogen chloride (HCl). However, many volcanoes also have cooler fumaroles, where water-rich hydrothermal systems on the volcano absorb the acidic gases, making them harder to detect. As a result, CO₂ emissions from these cooler sources are often overlooked, leading to significant underestimations in volcanic gas output.

The new technology exposes those hidden emissions, offering a more accurate quantification of the volcanoes gas output."

https://www.manchester.ac.uk/about/news/new-technology-reveals-volcanic-co2-emis...

"Paul Wessel, emeritus professor with the SOEST Department of Earth Sciences; Seung-Sep Kim, SOEST alum and professor at Chungnam National University (Korea); and researchers from Scripps Institution of Oceanography recently published a study identifying 19,325 new seamounts. This work expanded a previously published catalog that had 24,643 seamounts.

The journal Science shared this discovery as a News feature. Excerpts of that article are below. "

https://www.soest.hawaii.edu/soestwp/announce/news/more-than-19000-undersea-volc...

What's missing? Any logical arguments. Next you will be telling us most emissions of CO2 are human.

Strange that. You include manmade emissions since the LIA (before the industrial Revolution), but only annual emissions for natural.

And then there are the volcanoes, mostly subsea mounts and include estimates of CO2 from them, when we DON"T know how much. SWAG. (Simply Wild Ass Guesses)

And then of course you somehow come to the conclusion that natural emissions can't go up, can't go down, but must remain stable.

BTW - CO2 lags temperature.

You should get off Deepseek and find something fit for purpose.

According to Our World in Data cumulative anthropogenic emissions since 1750 are 1,812,356,300,000.00 t or 1,812Gt in 2023. The emissions in 1900 were 0.009Gt. The net increase was 1811.991Gt

The anomaly from 1900 to 2023 was about 1.54C.

Ignoring the fact that CO2 has a reducing logarithmic effect on temperature, that would mean each Gt of CO2 would affect temperature by 0.00085C. Of course that is too small to measure. The IPCC puts it at 0.0006C in 2021.

And then of course there is the accuracy of liquid-in-glass (LIG) thermometers. There are manufacturing inaccuracies as well as parallax error etc affecting the readings. The UK Met office has the Hadley Centre for observations.

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut5/data/HadCRUT.5.0.2.0/download.html

They give both annual and monthly datasets in CSV format, downloadable to excel or similar. The Monthly figures are supposedly accurate back to 1850 to 8 decimal places, Annual to 7 decimal places. So that means that all they are doing is dividing by the number of months or years as the case may be. That will give Precision, NOT Accuracy. So just how accurate were the measurements?