3 ms·
Hmm, that doesn't shout "plants absorb 30% more CO2 than we thought" as discussed in this thread.
by dr_dshiv 5y ago
Hmm, that doesn't shout "plants absorb 30% more CO2 than we thought" as discussed in this thread.
- unishark 5y agoI read that abstract twice and still can't parse it, but the 30% number comes from the noaa.gov website quote: "A new study published in the April 6 edition of the journal Nature concludes that as emissions of carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels have increased since the start of the 20th century, plants around the world are utilizing 30 percent more carbon dioxide (CO2), spurring plant growth." ...by the way perhaps not more than we thought (dunno?), but more than the 19th century.
- occamrazor 5y ago> 29–100% increase [in volume]reduces to 20–76% [increase in mass]. 30% is a decent point estimate for 20-76%.