Radiative effect of CO₂
Model the greenhouse effect by comparing the heating of a CO₂-enriched atmosphere (carbonated soda) and a normal atmosphere (flat soda) under a lamp.
Activity Summary
The student compares the temperature evolution in two chambers — one with CO₂-enriched air, one with normal air — under the same lamp, measuring with SCD40 sensors.
Introduction
The greenhouse effect is central to climate change, but can it be reproduced in the classroom? This experiment, inspired by the LAMAP protocol, compares the heating of two identical chambers placed under the same lamp: one with an atmosphere enriched in CO₂ (from carbonated soda) and one with normal air (from flat soda). The temperature difference, though small, is real and measurable with precise sensors.
Learning Objectives
- Measure temperature and CO₂ concentration simultaneously in two chambers
- Observe the enhanced warming of a CO₂-enriched atmosphere
- Critically discuss the limitations of the classroom model
- Understand the difference between the radiative greenhouse effect and convective confinement
Scientific Concepts
Instruments and sensors
Scientific instruments
- CO₂ and temperature logger (FizziQ Connect)
Sensors
- SCD40 sensor (CO₂ concentration in ppm and temperature in °C)
FizziQ Features
- Data export — Export the CO₂ and temperature curves recorded by each module for side-by-side comparison of the two chambers.
Required Materials
- - Smartphone or tablet with FizziQ Connect - Two M5 Stack modules with SCD40 sensors - Two identical transparent containers - Two bottles of the same soda (one degassed overnight) - A powerful lamp (halogen preferred) - Plastic wrap - Note: the protocol remains adaptable to any comparable CO₂ and temperature data-logging tool.
Experimental Protocol
The day before, open a bottle of soda and leave it open overnight to let the gas escape completely.
On the day of the experiment, prepare a second identical bottle, freshly opened and still carbonated.
Equip each M5 Stack module with an SCD40 sensor. Turn them on and verify they display CO₂ (ppm) and temperature (°C).
Pour the flat soda into the first container and the carbonated soda into the second. Use identical volumes.
Place an SCD40 sensor in each container, above the liquid (not submerged). Cover with plastic wrap to seal.
Note the initial CO₂ and temperature values for both chambers. The CO₂ in the carbonated chamber should be much higher.
Place both containers side by side, at the same distance from the lamp. Start recording on both modules.
Turn on the lamp (halogen preferred for strong infrared emission). Record for 60 to 90 minutes.
Stop the recording and export the data from each module in FizziQ Connect.
Compare the temperature and CO₂ curves for both chambers. Discuss the results, taking into account the model's limitations.
Expected Results
With carbonated soda, the CO₂ in the enriched chamber quickly reaches 40,000+ ppm (sensor saturation), while the flat soda chamber stays at a few hundred ppm. The temperature in the CO₂-enriched chamber rises 1-3°C more than the control after 60-90 minutes. The difference is small but reproducible.
Scientific Questions
- Why are results more convincing with a halogen lamp (more infrared) than an LED lamp?
- What are the limitations of this model compared to the real atmospheric greenhouse effect?
- Why is the term 'greenhouse effect' somewhat misleading?
- How does the enhanced greenhouse effect from human activities differ from the natural greenhouse effect?
- What evidence from satellite data confirms the atmospheric greenhouse effect?
Scientific Background
The **atmospheric greenhouse effect** is a radiative phenomenon: certain gases (CO₂, H₂O, CH₄) absorb infrared radiation emitted by the Earth's surface and re-emit it in all directions, including back toward the surface, causing additional warming.
In this experiment, the CO₂-enriched chamber does warm more, but the mechanisms involved are not purely radiative. In a container filled with dense CO₂, the air must be hotter to begin escaping, reducing convective cooling.
In a crystallizer filled with dense CO₂, the air must be hotter to start escaping and being replaced by fresh air. This **confinement effect** adds to any radiative effect.
The term '**greenhouse effect**' is itself misleading: in a horticultural greenhouse, warming is primarily due to **convective confinement** (blocking wind and mixing), not infrared absorption by the glass.
There is no simple classroom experiment that faithfully reproduces the radiative mechanism of the atmospheric greenhouse effect. This experiment is a model with significant limitations that should be discussed critically.
The real atmospheric greenhouse effect is measured by satellite: without the natural greenhouse effect, Earth's average temperature would be about -18°C instead of +15°C. The enhanced greenhouse effect from human CO₂ emissions is causing the observed global warming.
Extensions
- Test with Coca-Cola and Fanta to compare CO₂ release rates
- Use dry ice instead of soda for a higher CO₂ concentration
- Record over several hours and compare the thermal equilibrium temperatures
- Add a third chamber with methane (from a lighter refill, with safety precautions) to compare greenhouse gases
Frequently Asked Questions
The SCD40 sensor saturates at 40,000 ppm. Is this a problem?
The SCD40 range goes up to 40,000 ppm. If the concentration exceeds this, the readings plateau. This does not affect the temperature measurement.
The temperature difference is very small (< 1°C). Is the experiment valid?
Yes, the effect is real but small in a classroom setting. Use precise sensors and long recording times. The difference should be reproducible.
Why does the flat soda chamber also warm up?
Both chambers absorb light from the lamp and warm up. The CO₂ chamber warms slightly more. The relevant quantity is the temperature difference between the two.
Is this experiment proof of the greenhouse effect?
It is a simplified model with significant limitations. It demonstrates that CO₂-enriched air warms more under irradiation, but the mechanisms are not purely radiative. Use it as a starting point for critical discussion.
Detailed Description
The student prepares two identical chambers: one with freshly opened soda (releasing CO₂), the other with the same soda degassed overnight. Each chamber is equipped with an SCD40 sensor from FizziQ Connect. Both are placed under the same lamp and the temperature difference is recorded over 60-90 minutes. FizziQ Connect displays and logs CO₂ concentration and temperature from each sensor module in real time, and lets students export the paired curves so the two chambers can be compared directly.
Ready to start?
Download FizziQ and try this activity with your students.