Posted on 05/16/2018 7:32:57 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The demonization of the “miracle molecule,” carbon dioxide, continued last week with the announcement that its concentration had reached 410 parts per million (ppm). Nearly all reporting of this noted that this was the highest level in 800,000 years and predicted a host of associated climate calamities. While the current concentration of this vital gas is about 40% higher than at the start of the Industrial Revolution, unreported is that Earth has been suffering from steadily decreasing and perilously low concentrations of CO2. Until the consumption of fossil fuels began liberating this important gas from ancient rocks , the Earth had been flirting with dangerously low levels not seen for more than 600 million years.
During nearly all of Earth’s history, carbon dioxide concentration was at many multiples of our current level, averaging 2,600 ppm, or 6.5 times our current measurement. Forerunners of most of the plants we rely on for sustenance first appeared around 150 million years ago when CO2 levels were more than 2,000 ppm. Since that time CO2 has fallen steadily and precipitously.
In fact, at the end of the last ice age, carbon dioxide reached the dangerously low level of 182 ppm, thought to be the lowest since the Pre-Cambrian time period more than 600 million years ago. Why is it dangerous? Because 150 ppm is the lowest level at which plant life can survive. We came within a whisker of breaching that “line of death.” Until we began adding CO2 to the atmosphere, there was no guarantee that this horrific threshold would not be crossed in the future.
Rather than spreading fear of increasing carbon dioxide, we should be thankful that both the Earth and humanity are thriving, in part due to more CO2.
It has been long known that increasing CO2 benefits plant growth through the CO2 fertilization effect. Recognizing the benefits of this, greenhouses often increase CO2 to 1,500 ppm. Research from laboratory studies by the Center for the Study of CO2 and Global Change have documented that a 300 ppm rise in CO2 levels would increase plant biomass by 25 to 50%. This significant boost in plant productivity, along with a boost from lengthening growing seasons, means that we are better able to feed a hungry planet.
An additional significant benefit from this increasing CO2 fertilization is that the plants have smaller stomata (pores) and have lessened water needs. Less water used means that more stays in the ground and is leading to increasing soil moisture across much of the planet and a “greening” of the Earth. According to NASA, up to 50% of the Earth is “greening,” in part due to higher CO2 levels. This increased soil moisture is a primary cause for the long-term decrease in forest fires and droughts worldwide.
The benefits of increasing CO2 don’t stop with accelerating plant growth and increasing soil moisture. The biological impacts section of the 2014 white paper Climate change reconsidered II provided quite a lengthy list of additional benefits in addition to those mentioned above. The main points are listed below:
More CO2makes plants grow faster and with less stress.
Forests are growing faster in response to increasing CO2.
More CO2stimulates growth of beneficial bacteria in both soil and water.
CO2fertilization, leading to more plant growth, means less erosion of topsoil.
More CO2means bigger crop yields, and more and bigger flowers.
More CO2fosters glomalin, a beneficial protein created by root fungi.
More CO2helps plants to create natural repellants to fight insect predators.
Although I do not pretend to speak for the planet’s flora, I am quite certain that, if plants had a say in the matter, they would not lobby for reductions in CO2 levels. For plants, CO2 is food. They need more of it, not less.
My hypothesis is that they were right in the 70s (impending Ice Age), but for the wrong reasons.
The solar minimum is upon us, the irony being that without industrialization we might have been a couple volcanic events or other minor cosmic event away from ice-sheet city.
I believe that when certain events coincide with the solar minimum - terrestrial or otherwise - the planet dips into a deep freeze until another set of events trigger its release.
We may never know what brought about the end of the last ice age for certain, as I believe that the whole “ice core gas sampling” thing is defective in premise, an associative argument for global warming no different than fat was to the lipid hypothesis.
Small minds...
Correction.... water vapor
Let’s not allow the unlearned (media) deny simple algebra while decrying “science deniers”. 2+2=4, therefore 4-2=2. Hard sciences are proven through the numerical triumvirate: math+algebra+calculus.
According to the recent PBS special, an increase in the atmospheric CO2 retains thermal radiation (IR energy); it “doesn’t allow the escape of heat”. While this is a scientific fact, it does not take into account any of the REFLECTIVE/DEFLECTIVE action of CO2. Incoming IR energy is deflected away from the earth in same manner AND RATE it is reflected back into the atmosphere.
CO2 is actually a MODERATOR of atmospheric temperature.
It’s math AND science.
Paper titled "Can Measurements of the Near‐Infrared Solar Spectral Irradiance be Reconciled? A New Ground‐Based Assessment Between 4,000 and 10,000 cm-1" says "About 25% of the Sun's energy reaches Earth in this [near IR] spectral region, which makes it important for quantifying the global energy budget, particularly since it is home to several strong water vapor, CO2, and other absorption bands." and the paper concludes that the amount of NIR is probably lower. In any case the other 75% of the incoming radiation is higher frequencies that are mostly not absorbed by CO2, water vapor or other greenhouse gases.
In contrast to the hot sun, the earth is pretty cool and thus radiates most of its energy at lower frequencies. The difference between the higher frequencies from the sun and lower frequencies from the earth is why increases in greenhouse gases cause warming. Of course that is oversimplified since the earth has wide variety of temperatures, surface materials vary, and the "greenhouse" is extremely uneven due to water vapor. Not to mention the gaping holes in the greenhouse" from convection.
But the greenhouse of greenhouse gases is quite sinilar to a glass greenhouse in it's basic operation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.