Look up the data for ice samples taken in Greenland (I think, it's been a while since I read the data) and the percentages of gases enclosed measured by gas chromatography. Anyway these are deep core samples of ice dating to the 1400's and even farther back. If you look at recorded temperature versus the content of CO2 in the atmosphere, there is actually a reverse correlation to CO2 and temperature, in other words as the temperatures get colder, CO2 levels rise and vice versa, with a slight lag at abrupt changes. CO2 is such a miniscule component of atmospheric greenhouse gases (water vapor being the greatest) that it's effect is nominal at best. Also plug any data in the so called "hockey stick" graph equation (NL Ball stats for example) and you still get a hockey stick because there is a proven yet for some reason, unheralded flaw in the equation. You can BELIEVE anything you wish, but actual data over the millenia is against you.

Regarding this article, the solar tracker is great and I think it's excellent this person decided to get more hands on experience with measuring how CO2 can act as an insulator. However I think the instruments are insufficient depth to simulate infrared getting trapped in an atmosphere. But it really says something that the author was able to get any results at all at this scale.

I don't mean to be a troll. Your design is nice and well thought out. You should use your talents on more useful research. Anthro-progenic Global Warming is a scam started by General Electric in the 80's to sell a new generation of "Green" products. There is even an internal memo stating that very thing. (can't find it currently or I would link) Follow the money. Al Gore is getting stinking rich off his role in the scam. The myth has been further perpetuated by egotistical and gullible naturalist. I say egotistical because man has a tiny effect on the planet as a whole. Man has, only slightly, effected the weather around large metropolitan areas. Rain storms seem to avoid the vertically radiated heat from asphalt and concrete. Other than that the planet is much larger and more resilient than we could possibly destroy. (nuke excluded from statement) If you study the known history of CO2, you will find that the levels of CO2 increase after a warming trend begins. That means it is an effect of the warming cycle not the cause. Then after a warming cycle you usually get a cooling cycle. Maybe that means that CO2 is the cause of Global Cooling. (I doubt that) The main factor in the increase/decrease in global temp is the Sun's cycle of sun spot activity. Mars and Venus average temperatures follow the averages of the earth.

Wrong way to go about it. Measuring CO₂ is pretty easy - IR spectrophotometer for one. But other people already measure atmospheric  CO₂ and report it. What extra value do you get out of these?

L