New study demonstrates the role of urban greenery in CO2 exchange

Watts up with That? ^ | June 27, 2012 | Anthony Watts

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

From the University of California – Santa Barbara

These are views of vegetation in summer and winter of suburban Minneapolis landscapes from the 500 foot tall KUOM radio tower where measurements for the study were made.

In what might be the first study to report continuous measurements of net CO₂ exchange of urban vegetation and soils over a full year or more, scientists from UC Santa Barbara and the University of Minnesota conclude that not only is vegetation important in the uptake of the greenhouse gas, but also that different types of vegetation play different roles. Their findings will be published July 4 in the current issue of the Journal of Geophysical Research – Biogeosciences, a publication of the American Geophysical Union.

“There has been little research of this type in the urban landscape,” said Joe McFadden, an associate professor in the UC Santa Barbara Department of Geography, and a co-author of the study. While continuous CO₂ measurements have been made in natural ecosystems all around the globe, only in the past few years have researchers attempted to use them in developed areas such as cities and suburbs, which often contain large amounts of green space.

“The net exchange of CO₂ between the land and the atmosphere is determined by the balance between things that release CO₂, such as burning fossil fuels and respiration of living organisms, and the uptake of CO₂ by plant photosynthesis,” said first author Emily Peters, from the University of Minnesota.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Might be good if some Judges heard about this....

If CO2 is a pollutant....why do plants seem to live on it.?

[Tenacious 1]

There are missing one simple, itty-bitty thing (but don’t tell them).

What happens when something organic dies? In the course of decomposition, what is one of the offgasses as biological components decay? Oh yea, CO2.

Gee whiz. If you weren’t paying close enough attention to the alarmist, you might start to think CO2 was a main component, predecessor and successor to all biological life (or just a polutant if your livelihood depends on such conclusions).

[JoeFromSidney]

Some elementary chemistry. Green plants take CO2 out of the atmosphere and convert it into their structure (stem, roots, leaves, fruit, seeds, etc.) When the plant dies, all that carbon goes back into the air as CO2. If any part of the plant is eaten, part of the carbon enters the structure of the eater, and the rest is breathed back into the air as CO2. In short, from sprout, life, death, decay, or digestion, every atom of carbon extracted from the air by plants is eventually returned to the air. The net oxygen production, and the net CO2 removal, are both ZERO.

[PeterPrinciple]

Ahh, the carbon cycle which used to be talked.

If you want to stimulate growth in plants you will increase c02 levels. In other wards lack of co2 is limiting plant growth now.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

So can we say the EPA is killing the Greenry of the Globe....

So what about the Green Jobs?

Semantic games here.

[Marine_Uncle]

RE: "If CO2 is a pollutant....why do plants seem to live on it.?"
And humans produce it then breath it out.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

See #6.

[Bigh4u2]

There is a quick and efficient way to reduce the CO2 output...

All greenies are restricted to inhaling only!!

Should solve the problem in short order.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Not a problem here in Pittsburgh. Probably 25% of our land is too steep to build on anyway.

[Marine_Uncle]

RE: "So can we say the EPA is killing the Greenry of the Globe.... So what about the Green Jobs?"
Yes. The EPA is killing innocent plants.

[munin]

There is a quick and efficient way to reduce the CO2 output...

All greenies are restricted to inhaling only!!

Should solve the problem in short order
Hear hear, I have been using this argument for years, but think \i’m just joking, I can asure you I’m not

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Ernest.