Serious question, here – I am just wondering.
Seems scientists have found a way to pull carbon out of the atmosphere and dispose of it.
Which I guess could mean the “climate change” problem has a tentative “solution.”
But…if you pull out too much carbon, won’t you affect the trees and plants? Don’t they take in carbon and release oxygen?
And should we be screwing with the atmosphere for the sake of a very unsettled “science” that no one can prove?
July 25th, 2008 | 2:33 am | #1
Given that NASA has found that plant growth has gone up….
Really bad idea to screw with it.
I would *really* like about 300 times the CO2 we have right now– won’t hurt folks breathing it, will make for more plants, and might dull the next ice age.
July 25th, 2008 | 6:38 am | #2
Arguably, there’s enough carbon in the atmosphere to keep the trees from keeling over. However, removing carbon from the atmosphere is at least as dangerous as pumping extra carbon into the atmosphere. We’re better off just not screwing around with it.
Of course, this exposes the fallacy of carbon “pollution,” doesn’t it? Carbon dioxide has never been air pollution; it’s plant food. Plant growth has increased due to man’s industrial CO2, and one of the reasons it’s taking so long for the Industrial Revolution to actually double atmospheric CO2 is that roughly half of the CO2 industries produce gets gulped down by plants, which then belch approvingly (ok, I made up the belching part.) Basically, the only bad part of industrial carbon is that poison ivy is thriving; the good part is, so are corn and beans.
July 25th, 2008 | 7:58 am | #3
It is amazing how driven the left is by their agenda. They are not really interested in real science, study or debate. They are determined to run with their agenda while they feel they have an open window. Let’s pray the window shuts come November!
July 25th, 2008 | 8:11 am | #4
If you removed a significant portion of the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere most photosynthesis would stop. No more plants. Then we could all live on Marmite and mushrooms.
July 25th, 2008 | 8:49 am | #5
This is from a paper entitled
“Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide”
Human use of coal, oil, and natural gas has not harmfully warmed the Earth, and the extrapolation of current trends shows that it will not do so in the foreseeable future. The CO2 produced does, however, accelerate the growth rates of plants and also permits plants to grow in drier regions. Animal life, which depends upon plants, also flourishes, and the diversity of plant and animal life is increased.
Human activities are producing part of the rise in CO2 in the atmosphere. Mankind is moving the carbon in coal, oil, and natural gas from below ground to the atmosphere, where it is available for conversion into living things. We are living in an increasingly lush environment of plants and animals as a result of this CO2 increase. Our children will therefore enjoy an Earth with far more plant and animal life than that with which we now are blessed.”
Here is the web address so you can read the whole thing. Given that cereal crops feed many people it is probably hurtful to ’sequester’ CO2.
[edited to admit link - admin]
July 25th, 2008 | 9:05 am | #6
It’s been discovered that at night, trees pump out carbon. They only pump out oxygen in the day time. Hmmm, less trees, less carbon? A solution to ‘global warming’?
July 25th, 2008 | 10:50 am | #7
In the book, Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years, the authors cites several studies that confirm that elevated levels of carbon dioxide enhance plant growth (I thought that was suppose to be a good thing). They also point out that carbon dioxide is naturally released by oceans as water temperatures rise (rather like warm soda). This is a great read for anyone who wants and easily digestible scientific discourse with real data and sensible analysis.
[edited to insert link -admin]
July 25th, 2008 | 11:03 am | #8
[...] But woudn’t this kill the trees? [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact