The Greening of the Earth Continues

Carbon is the basic building block of life - at least as we know it - and it becomes so when CO2 is withdrawn from the atmosphere by photosynthesizing plants that use it to construct their tissues. Because of this fact, and because literally thousands of laboratory and field experiments have demonstrated that the more CO2 there is in the air the better plants grow and the more efficiently they utilize water, it has been postulated that continued anthropogenic CO2 emissions will lead to a significant "greening of the earth" (Idso, 1986). This suggestion constitutes a great hypothesis, because the inadvertent experiment humanity is currently conducting - our flooding of the air with CO2 as a result of burning prodigious quantities of fossil fuels - will ultimately demonstrate the truth of the hypothesis or expose its fallacy.

Perhaps the most comprehensive exposition of the status of the unplanned experiment was provided by Idso (1995), who cited a wealth of evidence for the validity of the greening hypothesis. First, he described the ubiquitous range expansions of earth's woody plants that began approximately two centuries ago, when the air's CO2 content began to rise in response to the gathering steam of the Industrial Revolution. Second, he described how the growth rates of many forests around the world increased concurrently, and how the most recent decades of fastest-rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations exhibited the greatest growth-rate enhancements. Third, he described how the amplitude of the seasonal oscillation of the atmosphere's CO2 concentration - which is driven primarily by the photosynthetic and respiratory activities of the terrestrial biota - had risen hand in hand with the air's CO2 content over the prior thirty-five years of precise measurements of this phenomenon.

More recently, Zhou et al. (2001) used satellite measurements to demonstrate how vegetative activity increased by slightly over 8% and 12% between 1981 and 1999 in North America and Eurasia, respectively; while Ahlbeck (2002) employed statistical procedures to demonstrate that the primary driver of this phenomenon was the concurrent rise in the air's CO2 content, with regional warming playing a secondary role. When some controversy arose over this conclusion (Kaufmann et al., 2002), we confirmed Ahlbeck's assessment of the situation by means of a quantitative comparison of what was observed via satellite and what would have been expected on the basis of the known strength of the aerial fertilization effect of the increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration that occurred over the period in question (see our Editorial of 18 September 2002).

Perhaps the most up-to-date information on the greening of the earth was made public in a brief article by Fred Pearce that was posted on the web site of New Scientist magazine on 16 September 2002. Entitled "Africa's deserts are in 'spectacular' retreat," it tells the story of vegetation reclaiming great tracts of barren land across the entire southern edge of the Sahara. This information may come as a bit of a surprise to many, especially since the United Nations Environment Program told the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa in August of this year (2002) that over 45% of the continent is currently experiencing severe desertification. As is often the case with the environmental pronouncements of that great world body, however, the world of nature tells a vastly different story.

Pearce begins his article by reporting "the southern Saharan desert is in retreat, making farming viable again in what were some of the most arid parts of Africa," noting that "Burkina Faso, one of the West African countries devastated by drought and advancing deserts 20 years ago, is growing so much greener that families who fled to wetter coastal regions are starting to go home."

And the good news is not confined to Burkina Faso. "Vegetation," according to Pearce, "is ousting sand across a swathe of land stretching from Mauritania on the shores of the Atlantic to Eritrea 6000 kilometers away on the Red Sea coast." What is more, besides being widespread in space, the greening is widespread in time, having been happening since at least the mid-1980s.

Quoting Chris Reij of the Free University of Amsterdam, Pearce says "aerial photographs taken in June show 'quite spectacular regeneration of vegetation' in northern Burkina Faso." The data indicate the presence of more trees for firewood and more grassland for livestock. In addition, a survey that Reij is collating shows, according to Pearce, "a 70 percent increase in yields of local cereals such as sorghum and millet in one province in recent years." Also studying the area has been Kjeld Rasmussen of the University of Copenhagen, who reports that since the 1980s there has been a "steady reduction in bare ground" with "vegetation cover, including bushes and trees, on the increase on the dunes."

Pearce also reports on the work of a team of geographers from Britain, Sweden and Denmark that spent much of the past summer analyzing archived satellite images of the Sahel. Citing Andrew Warren of University College London as a source of information on this unpublished study, he says the results show "that 'vegetation seems to have increased significantly' in the past 15 years, with major regrowth in southern Mauritania, northern Burkina Faso, north-western Niger, central Chad, much of Sudan and parts of Eritrea."

Do these findings take us by surprise? Not in the least. Fully twenty years ago, Idso (1982) declared that if the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content were allowed to continue unabated, thereby enhancing plant growth and improving vegetative water use efficiency, "semi-arid lands not now suitable for cultivation could be brought into profitable production; and with added water available for irrigation, the deserts themselves could 'blossom as the rose'."

Also, in our Editorial of 15 March 1999, we reported that in a study of a series of satellite images of the Central and Western Sahel that were taken from 1980 to 1995, Nicholson et al. (1998) could find no evidence of any overall expansion of deserts and no drop in the rainfall use efficiency (similar to water use efficiency) of native vegetation. And we further reported that in a satellite study of the entire Sahel from 1982 to 1990, Prince et al. (1998) actually detected a steady rise in rainfall use efficiency, suggesting that plant productivity and coverage of the desert had increased during this period.

Yes, in spite of drought and everything else - natural or otherwise - that may have combined to frustrate biospheric productivity throughout the course of the Industrial Revolution and beyond, the greening of the earth continues ... courtesy of the aerial fertilization effect and the water conservation effect of the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content.

Reference
Ahlbeck, J.R. 2002. Comment on "Variations in northern vegetation activity inferred from satellite data of vegetation index during 1981-1999" by L. Zhou et al. Journal of Geophysical Research 107: 10.1029/2001389.

Idso, S.B. 1982. Carbon Dioxide: Friend or Foe? IBR Press, Tempe, Arizona, USA.

Idso, S.B. 1986. Industrial age leading to the greening of the Earth? Nature 320: 22.

Idso, S.B. 1995. CO2 and the Biosphere: The Incredible Legacy of the Industrial Revolution. Department of Soil, Water & Climate, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN.

Kaufmann, R.K., Zhou, L., Tucker, C.J., Slayback, D., Shabanov, N.V. and Myneni, R.B. 2002. Reply to Comment on "Variations in northern vegetation activity inferred from satellite data of vegetation index during 1981-1999" by J.R. Ahlbeck. Journal of Geophysical Research 107: 10.1029/1001JD001516.

Nicholson, S.E., Tucker, C.J. and Ba, M.B. 1998. Desertification, drought, and surface vegetation: An example from the West African Sahel. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 79: 815-829.

Prince, S.D., Brown De Colstoun, E. and Kravitz, L.L. 1998. Evidence from rain-use efficiencies does not indicate extensive Sahelian desertification. Global Change Biology 4: 359-374.

Zhou, L., Tucker, C.J., Kaufmann, R.K., Slayback, D., Shabanov, N.V. and Myneni, R.B. 2001. Variations in northern vegetation activity inferred from satellite data of vegetation index during 1981-1999. Journal of Geophysical Research 106: 20,069-20,083.

I beleive we can embrace the concept that CO 2 is a blessing not a poison. However the following statment should cause great concern.

"the ubiquitous range expansions of earth's woody plants that began approximately two centuries ago, when the air's CO2 content began to rise in response to the gathering steam of the Industrial Revolution."

A MAJOR WORD OF CAUTION. This article implies that it was the industrial revolution that started about 200 years ago is responsible for the increase in CO 2. If we buy into this the greenies will find a way to destroy advanced economies. In fact it is the activities of nature that drives the CO 2 content and absolutely dwarfs puny mankind. Consider:

1. A coal mine fire in China releases CO 2 at a rate that is 1/2 all mankind's output. (When the greenies get together to put out this fire we can believe that their agenda is actually the environment)

2. A single volcano eruption can put out more CO 2 than all of mankind over a decade. (Someone help me on this.)

3. The many gysers etc. at yellowstone put out 1/2 the amount of CO 2 of mankind.

4. There are apparently over 1000 active underwater volcanos in the South Pacific in a small area just the size of Wyoming. The vast majority of the Pacific ocean has not been surveyed.

5. I dont know the numbers of today's active volcanos but it is huge compared to a century ago. However, there is a relationship between earthquakes and volcanos. In the decade between 1900-1910 there was one worldwide earthquake that was greater than 6.5. This number rapidly increased each decade until it reached 127 earthquakes in the most recent decade.

6. It has been stated that mankind contributes 5% of all CO2 to natures 95%. I believe this completely overstates mankinds contribution.

Godspeed, The Dilg

Each person creates CO2 by breathing, and then uses machines or other things that emit CO2.

We might be able to control CO2 by controlling people. Who do we want to sacrifice first?

Well, CO2 is a good thing. Both terrestrial and aquatic plants thrive on the Carbon in it, releasing Oxygen which benefits man and animals. It's a symbiotic relationship.

Plants grown in double the current CO2 concentrations produce more, thus making more Oxygen, and taking up more Carbon. They also need less water.

What is the reason for controlling CO2 at all?
Before you answer consider the following:

Hey, CO2! What Have You Done for Me Lately?

From its pre-industrial level of 150 years ago (approximately 275 ppm), the air’s CO2 concentration has risen to nearly 375 ppm today. What has this extra 100 ppm of CO2 done for world agriculture?
Mayeux et al. (1997) analyzed this question with respect to wheat, which they studied in a 38-meter-long controlled environment chamber located in a ventilated glass house. This chamber was composed of five 7.6-m lengths of a 0.76-m-deep and 0.45-m-wide soil container topped with a transparent and tunnel-shaped polyethylene cover that was attached to its upper edges. Two day-neutral cultivars of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) were grown in four 0.6-m-long soil compartments in each of the five 7.6-m-long sections of the tunnel. In addition, a third spring wheat cultivar was seeded into the middle and two ends of each tunnel section prior to the planting of the two cultivars to be studied, i.e., Seri M82 (a semidwarf type representative of modern spring wheats) and Yaqui 54 (a traditional tall cultivar typical of what was used by American farmers 40 years ago). The third wheat cultivar served as a photosynthetic "sink" for CO2 as air passed through the chamber sections, so that a CO2 gradient was created through the "long and winding tunnel," from near 350 ppm at its entrance to approximately 200 ppm at its end.
Both of the studied wheat cultivars were irrigated weekly over the first half of the 100-day growing season, so as to maintain soil water contents near field capacity in each of the chamber sections. Over the last half of the growing season, however, this regimen was maintained on only half of the wheat of each cultivar, the other halves receiving no further additions of water in order to create droughted treatments in addition to the well-watered treatments.
At the conclusion of the experiment, the scientists determined that the growth response of the wheat was a linear function of atmospheric CO2 concentration in both cultivars under both soil water regimes. Based on the four linear regression equations they developed for grain yield in these situations, we calculate that the 100-ppm increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration experienced over the past century and a half should have increased the mean grain yield of these two wheat cultivars by approximately 72% under well-watered conditions and by about 48% under the water-stressed scenario the scientists studied, for a mean cultivar/water scenario response on the order of 60%.
This CO2-induced increase in commercial wheat productivity is considerably larger than what is generally observed in studies that elevate the air’s CO2 concentration to values above where it currently stands, due to the fact that the aerial fertilization effect of carbon dioxide is expressed much more strongly at lower atmospheric CO2 concentrations than it is at higher concentrations. Hence, there has been a tendency for the past benefits of the historical increase in the air’s CO2 content to be significantly underestimated, based on analyses of forward yield projections derived from atmospheric CO2 enrichment experiments. As the backward yield projections derived from the results of the atmospheric CO2 depletion experiments of Mayeux et al. clearly indicate, however, the historical rise in the air’s CO2 content has already increased real-world wheat yields by an astounding amount.
But the good "old" news is not restricted to wheat. Based on the voluminous data summarized by Idso and Idso (2000) for the world’s major food crops, the calculations we have made for wheat can be comparatively scaled to determine what the past 150-year increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration has likely done for other agricultural staples. Doing so, we find that the Industrial Revolution’s flooding of the air with CO2 has resulted in mean yield increases of 70% for other C3 cereals, 28% for C4 cereals, 33% for fruits and melons, 62% for legumes, 67% for root and tuber crops, and 51% for vegetables.
So the next time you hear someone spouting off about the evils of fossil fuels and the CO2 they emit to the atmosphere, tell them the other side of the story. Tell them they might not even be here without what the burning of coal, gas and oil has done for the planet in providing a goodly portion of the food that has sustained our enormous population growth of the past 150 years. Yes, there’s more than just blood flowing through our veins; there’s a bit of fossil fuel coursing through them as well.
Dr. Craig D. Idso
President
Dr. Keith E. Idso
Vice President
References Idso, C.D. and Idso, K.E. 2000. Forecasting world food supplies: The impact of the rising atmospheric CO2 concentration. Technology 7S: 33-55.
Mayeux, H.S., Johnson, H.B., Polley, H.W. and Malone, S.R. 1997. Yield of wheat across a subambient carbon dioxide gradient. Global Change Biology 3: 269-278.

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.

To find all articles tagged or indexed using Global Warming Hoax , click below:
	click here >>>	Global Warming Hoax	<<< click here
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)