Join openDemocracy's debate on the politics of climate change here
The counter represents the rising concentration of carbon dioxide in the Earths atmosphere, minute by minute, from April-December 2005.
It is a moving snapshot a grab from a longer film of a process which began around 200 years ago with industrialisation and looks set to continue for much of the 21st century.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is harmless to breathe, and essential to life as we know it. As a greenhouse gas, it keeps the Earth warmer than it would otherwise be.
But if the atmospheric concentration gets too high, the planet can heat dangerously.
For an introduction to the science of global warming, go to this at Wikipedia
Before the industrial age, the concentration was around 270 parts per million (ppm). Then, humans started to burn fossil fuels first coal, later oil and gas. This released greenhouse gases into the atmosphere much faster than natural processes could reabsorb them.
Today, the concentration is around 378ppm. The amount by which it increases varies year by year. Recently, it has averaged about 1.86ppm per year.
Almost no one questions the evidence of a rapid rise in CO2 or that it is the result of human action. But people do differ as to its significance.
Some powerful players continue to question whether it matters, arguing that the human impact on climate is likely to be negligible compared to that of other processes.
Ever since regular measurements began in 1959, a steady increase in atmospheric concentrations at Mauna Loa, Hawaii - subject to small seasonal fluctuations - has been directly observed
The majority of people, however, think that rising CO2 is a major challenge. But they differ on what actions are necessary and how soon.
Science indicates that stabilisation of the Earths climate will require sharp reductions in emissions of atmospheric concentrations of CO2 during the 21st century.
But the global economys appetite for fossil fuels is accelerating.
The good news is that it has been and continues to be repeatedly demonstrated that more efficient use of energy, new technology and more thoughtful forms of development sharply reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, at the same time as improving wellbeing and increasing profitability.
The bad news is that powerful vested interests want to prevent this from happening, and that denial and indifference are pervasive.
The counter will keep ticking throughout openDemocracys debate on the politics of climate change.
More about the counter
The counter is inspired by the Carbon Clock, a project of E3G.
E3Gs Carbon Clock will be an interactive tool showing how incremental rises in temperature are likely to impact the essential ecosystems on which human life and health depend, along with much of the rest of life on Earth.
It is reckoned that, for example, a one-degree Centigrade increase in temperature could see the demise of already critically endangered species such as the Bengal tiger (India) and mountain gorilla (Central Africa). At an increase of one-to-two degrees, rice farmers who feed hundreds of millions in Asia and elsewhere are likely to see their crops fail. Such impacts are likely to be imminent.
The Carbon Clock is a reminder that unless we make different decisions now about how we produce and use energy and how we transport people and goods, we will face increasing difficulties sustaining life on Earth, says Anita Neville of E3G.
More about the numbers
The counter starts on 21 April 2005 the first day of openDemocracys debate at 378.626 parts per million, represented as 378 626 095. It runs until 31 December 2005.
The start figure is derived from the global average CO2 concentration for 2004 based on the most recently published figure of 378 parts per million (CDIAC), plus an increment for the first sixteen weeks of 2005 (assuming this will be an average year for CO2 increase).
The counter ticks over by one digit in the ninth column around every seventeen seconds. This represents one part of carbon dioxide per 1,000 billion.
The counter is not a real-time representation of the state of the atmosphere, but it is an indicator of the smoothed trend of the per-year increase - minus the noise represented by seasonal fluctuations (during spring and summer in the northern hemisphere, for example, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide fall slightly relative to their winter level).
But the trend, year on year, is rising.
Each increment on the carbon counter is small, but it is a marker on the way to a different world, and a reminder of the choices humanity makes every moment during the openDemocracy debate.
For more information on the climate clock project contact Anita Neville at E3G
This article appears as part of openDemocracy's online debate on the politics of climate change. The debate was developed in partnership with the British Council as part of their ZeroCarbonCity initiative - a two year global campaign to raise awareness and stimulate debate around the challenges of climate change.