Plants, CO2 and temperature

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by sculptor, Aug 8, 2021.

  1. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,027

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    your thoughts?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,810
    Er, yes?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,027
    one interesting coincidence is that the plants studied are most efficient at a tad over the "normal" human body temperature

    easy to control in a greenhouse
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,810
    Yes. So what?
     
  8. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,027
    LOL

    you're a hoot
     
  9. geordief Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,624
    Another mystic meg thread?
     
  10. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,923
    Is this trying to sell us on why we don’t need to lessen carbon emissions?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2021
  11. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,194
    I suspect. This is the "CO2 is a miracle plant nutrient that will green the planet and save us all!" angle. It's one of the Type III denials.
     
  12. geordief Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,624
    Not so much corny as sweet corny?(mebbe lost in translation?)
     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2021
  13. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,027
    NO absolutely NOT

    Do what you can do---so I planted enough trees to go carbon neutral over 30 years ago.
    By now, my carbon footprint is so light, it's like I'm walking on air.
    Personally i have always gone with fuel efficient vehicles
    and, I recommend both of these approaches
    also---reduce, repair, rebuild, repurpose, recycle (a lady ranger gave me those 5 Rs 45 years ago---handsome woman, I really enjoyed our conversations and treks through the swamp)

    The primary producers were here first
    caring about their welfare is kinda like respecting your forebears

    What is good for them is ultimately good for us

    so
    How nice that we give them a warmer world and more CO2:
    (see above)
    Which, they really seem to like

    .......................................................
    Lighten up dudes, we ain't the problem, we're the solution---or, at least we can be.
     
  14. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,810
    And this does what for sea level rise, the stopping of the Gulf Stream, desertification and changes in global rainfall pattern?
     
  15. Benson Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    230
    Don't worry kid, the earth's climate has been doing that for billions of years. The people of The people of Atlantis were annoyed, I bet they wished they'd built on higher ground, must have been form their Global Warming problems.
     
  16. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,810
    Yes, let's be facetious about it. That should fix it.
     
  17. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,027
  18. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,810
  19. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,027
    I'll just let you worry about what you think the models indicate.

    OTOH
    If everyone followed my lead, that shouldn't be much of a problem.

    ......................................
    What have you done to mitigate the carbon enrichment of the atmosphere?
    Get rid of the air conditioner?
    Wear a sweater in the winter?
    Give up driving except when necessary?
    Reduce, repair, rebuild, repurpose, recycle as a daily habit?

    Or, do you just complain about your worries hoping that someone else will sacrifice to solve your perceived problems?
     
  20. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,810
    As you have still failed to answer my question, I'll ask you again: what do you think this stuff you have posted about plant growth will do to mitigate sea level rise, the stopping of the Gulf Stream, desertification and changes in global rainfall pattern?

    Or do you perhaps think the models do not indicate any of these, and they are just products of my personal, fevered imagination?
     
  21. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,027
    ex
    stop for a second
    take a deep breath
    and
    look at the title of this thread
     
  22. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,923
    Maybe some here feel you’re trying to put a positive “spin” on carbon emissions? I doubt your posting this with malice (it’s just a discussion), but while plant growth may improve (to varying degrees), the negative effects of climate change would seem to outweigh the positives. If you disagree with that, can you explain why?
     
  23. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    You probably didn't. Thirty years ago nobody knew what kinds of trees to plant where to counterbalance various carbon release setups. The details are still in research. And I seriously doubt you've kept up with the research - you never argue from evidence, which usually indicates a reliance on media memes from the most industrious propaganda sources - matching your typical post.

    You might have been lucky and wealthy enough, but it's not the way to bet.
    Other people also try to talk their fellow citizens into not electing incompetent fascist demagogues to high governmental office - that way we might be able to help solve other people's problems as well as our own. It's what grownups do.

    Meanwhile, some plants exhibit higher photosynthesis rates at higher temps when there's enough CO2 to counter the respiration boost, and some don't (example: C4 plants, like corn, often do not benefit from higher CO2 levels in the air). Some prefer higher photosynthesis rates, and some don't. Quite often, wild plants (not being irrigated and fertilized and protected from herbivory or disease) do well at higher rates of CO2 supply for a while, and then suffer consequences of various side effects (in the Cedar Creek research plots connected to the U of M the benefits of CO2 enrichment last longer at lower temperatures, but even when protected like that they give out in less than 8 years on average - last I heard the general best guess explanation was nutrient depletion of the soil - CO2 is seldom a limiting nutrient).
     

Share This Page