3 ms·
Doesn't this also lead to increased flora, which is a more rapid way of re-sequestering carbon?
by prometheus76 3y ago
Doesn't this also lead to increased flora, which is a more rapid way of re-sequestering carbon?
- dheera 3y agoNo, more CO2 in the air does not lead to increased flora. In fact, the higher temperatures will more likely destabilize ecosystems and result in more deserts and habitats unsuitable for flora. We're also cutting down flora at an unprecedented rate for meat farming and other uses. Flora also don't grow that rapidly. Fossil fuels are compacted, sequestered carbon from thousands of years.
- dragonwriter 3y ago> No, more CO2 in the air does not lead to increased flora. Are you sure? “A quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25 [,2016]. […] The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States. […] Studies have shown that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide increase photosynthesis, spurring plant growth. […] Results showed that carbon dioxide fertilization explains 70 percent of the greening effect, said co-author Ranga Myneni, a professor in the Department of Earth and Environment at Boston University.” https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2436/co2-is-making-earth-greenerfor-now/ https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2436/co2-is-making-earth-green...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 2479411230 3y agoI don't think this is accurate. Increased CO2 can lead to increased flora--though not enough to offset the negative effects of additional CO2 in the first place.
- prometheus76 3y agoWhy do commercial greenhouses have CO2 generators? I am not following your argument at all. I haven't seen evidence for your first claim (and asked you a follow-up question related to that). We're not cutting down flora for meat farming. We are changing some environments over to farming, but that farm land is largely being used to raise...more plants. In addition, I remember seeing a study (I don't have time to try and find it) that showed that we have more trees now than anytime in the last 500 years. Your third claim (flora also don't grow that rapidly) is just an assertion that doesn't really make sense to me. And the final statement about fossil fuels is a non sequitur.
- reaperman 3y ago> In addition, I remember seeing a study (I don't have time to try and find it) that showed that we have more trees now than anytime in the last 500 years. Maybe in Europe, only. But absolutely not globally. The amazon deforestation alone...
- 2479411230 3y agoYes, it will lead to increased flora. > Increased temperatures can lengthen growing seasons, higher carbon dioxide concentrations can enhance plant growth, and in some areas rainfall and the availability of water resources can increase as a result of climate change. See https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/676601468249642651/pdf/Looking-beyond-the-horizon-how-climate-change-impacts-and-adaptation-responses-will-reshape-agriculture-in-Eastern-Europe-and-Central-Asia.pdf https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/6766014682496426... However, as that document goes into, the benefit from the extra flora won't be enough to offset the negative impacts of increased CO2.