3 ms·
30% increase in carbon consumption by plants is not minor if true.
by morpheos137 5y ago
30% increase in carbon consumption by plants is not minor if true.
- Filligree 5y agoIt could be. How large is that carbon consumption in the first place?
- morpheos137 5y agoMy understanding is that on earth the two main carbon sinks are biomass and the oceans. I believe these sinks make up almost 100% of natural carbon sequestration. So it could be a big amount. I'd check the carbon cycle wiki article.
- raducu 5y agoBut is biomass a permanent sink or just a temporary buffer? I mean every year we keep pumping more carbon into the atmosphere, but unless biomass turns into coal, it is just a temporary buffer for carbon, right?
- morpheos137 5y agoEverything is temporary on a long enough time scale. If new plants grow to replace those that die it is potentially sustainable.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- lamontcg 5y agoIt is temporary. The increase in biomass due to CO2 saturates when the area locally runs out of other constraints like water or nitrogen. The IPCC predicts by 2100 the land is going to convert into a net source rather than sink of carbon -- so the positive feedback loops will exceed the negative feedback stabilizers. The increase in biomass also comes at a decrease in nutrient density as well, so its not like this is magic sauce for croplands.
- qqqwerty 5y agoIt would have to be closer to 200-300% in order to solve our problem. You can easily Google search for these numbers. And this would just get us to neutral on CO2. We would still have to deal with methane and water vapor, both of which are more potent greenhouse gases.