Climate Change

[Deltabravo]

I'm still wondering WTF atmospheric content at 650 km and above has to do with anything. That's about 250 km above the orbit of the space station and about 550 km above what is generally considered to be the start of space. There isn't a whole lot of anything up there except space junk.

I'm guessing that DeltaBravo actually has no idea of the ozone layer's altitude, which commences
around 15,000 metres above the earth's surface and extends upwards to around 50,000 metres.  
I have no idea why he was posting atmospheric gas figures of 200,000 metres to 500,000 metres.

Nice infographic...

When CO2 is produced, at ground level, it can only rise as a result of being heated or by tubulence in the air.  Left to itself, it settles down and does not rise because it is heavier than air.  

If you search for scientific articles which explain how a heavy gas like CO2 rises up into the atmosphere or is found at high altitude, the best you will find is a study on carbon monoxide at high level in mountainous tourists resorts, caused by cars.  Otherwise, this field is dealt with by posts about how CO2 is heavier, is found near the ground and only rises due to coming into contact with warm air.  If that's the case, then you are talking about a very patchy type of effect, typically affecting air in and around cities and being affected by weather conditions and temperature.  

Even if you can say that heavy gases mix in with lighter gases, CO2 will tend to drop and will eventually, if drawn high enough upwards, precipitate out, not because of weight, but because it will freeze.

Here's a typical post on the subject on Reddit, for example:  

"If left undisturbed, CO2 does sink lower to the ground than oxygen, although they both form separate exponential profiles (it's not like the bottom half of a volume is 100% CO2 while the top half is 100% oxygen - they both have distributions that tail off exponentially with height - it's just that the CO2 /oxygen density ratio is higher at the bottom of a large undisturbed container than at the top). For example, in large grain silos where CO2 can chemically build up, the CO2 sinks more to the bottom. A worker who walks directly into the bottom of the silo may find that he has too much CO2/not enough oxygen and can't breath properly. From the Penn State agricultural website:
"Like carbon dioxide, nitrogen dioxide is heavier than air so the highest concentration of gas is typically located at the silage surface, which is the area where a person will be going if they need to enter the silo for any reason."
Out in the open atmosphere, there is enough motion in the air to keep the oxygen and carbon dioxide mixed up. This motion of the air mostly comes from convection currents (i.e. wind) caused by temperature differences. But if you go up high enough in the atmosphere, the temperature differences even out enough that the vertical mixing becomes insignificant. The higher part of the atmosphere does indeed have the different molecules settle out to different altitudes depending on their density. The altitude that marks the point separating the part of the atmosphere that is mixed and the higher part of the atmosphere that is not mixed is called the turbopause. In the region above the turbopause, hydrogen and helium are the lightest and form the highest parts of the atmosphere. Oxygen is heavier and is farther down in this region. The turbopause is at about 13 km above Earth's surface, which is above the highest mountain, but below where many airplanes fly."https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2jzzlj/if_co2_is_heavier_than_air_why_doesnt_it_all_sink/

What this suggests is that this "greenhouse" effect has to be below the level airplanes fly and that the effect of CO2 is going to be limited by the distance it can travel with convection from, for instance, the sun heating the ground and winds. In other words, it's not a gas that dissipates from its source and naturally drifts upwards, like H20 to form clouds at certain levels in a way that uniformly affects clouds.

In fact, I found a very good description of it in a book by a man called Omar:

..and like Wind I go.
Into this Universe, and Why not knowing
Nor Whence, like Water willy-nilly flowing;
And out of it, as Wind along the Waste,
I know not Whither, willy-nilly blowing.