Many, many studies have showed dramatically increased plant growth with elevated CO2 levels. A recent U of M 12yr study (Donald Zak) using mixed hardwood groves found that 570 ppm CO2 would result in an average 26% improvement in tree growth, even with phenotypes adjusted for current CO2 levels. Many greenhouse operators use CO2 generators to bump up CO2 to 1000 ppm or higher, because it makes plants grow much better. If you want to reduce third world hunger, emit more CO2!
The UTTER STUPIDITY on display here is mind boggling!! One tree supposedly reacts better to increased CO2 in a closed system & many here think that means it would be just fine to create that experiment with the entire globe! WTF? That tree was not subjected to the warming that comes with increased CO2 either. Plus, many plants would react poorly to increased CO2 because they EVOLVED at the current levels & would not be able to adapt fast enough to cope with the rapid rise of CO2 we see today!!
I still think the removal of plant ability to produce carbon dioxide, oxygen through the borate of alumina sprayed from chem trails is a direct intent to enforce a carbon tax fraud like climate enduced change through chem trails and the global warming fraud... the crops are being attacked for a reason... all monsanto business... a criminal fraud
BUT if you do this on a bigger scale- (not to think about a experimental planetary.. global! scale!) you get problems.. lot of problems. Look into it without this bias and get real. Only talking about farmer stuff.. crops and so on. Not the general, global scale.. omg you guys are.. incredible.
EVEN if it would have totally positive aspects.. "co2=plant food.." (lol..) - what about ocean acidificaton? Ever heard of?
I know I’m writing to a scientific illiterate people so arguing about CAGW and the push for a new energy poverty economy, the greatest scam in history leads nowhere. But, I find it amusing that you are upset of me pointing out that plants grow better in elevated levels of CO2, which is a fact and not controversial even among warmers.
@aerobique, a recent U of M paper about a larger-scale 12-year study found that increasing CO2 from ~380 ppm to ~570 ppm resulted in a 26% increase in tree growth.
Ocean acidifciation is a non-problem, too. There's nearly 50x as much CO2 in the oceans than in the atmosphere, so anthropogenic CO2 emissions can only slightly affect CO2 levels in the oceans, and thus can only slightly affect the pH of the oceans. For more info see barrettbellamyclimate(.)com(/)page50(.)htm
@aerobique, ocean acidification is a red herring. The oceans are alkaline, not acid, and no amount of CO2 emissions can change that. Moreover, ocean pH varies considerably by location and depth, without harming marine life. Moreover, there's 50x as much CO2 dissolved in the oceans as there is in the air, so human CO2 emissions can't possibly have much long term effect on CO2 levels in the deep oceans.
There is no right level of CO2 our bodys work like a fishes does under water it rips the oxygen out of the air the CO2 will help plants grow including produce and we will run out of things to burn. Lets face it fossil fuels come from dead things and in order for things to be dead they had to be living therfor there was no to much CO2 on this planet from the start and we will never die so any moran that thinks there is too much is fucking retarded.
plants were huge when the dinosaurs were around because of the enriched co2 atmosphere, the reason we dont have abnormally giant plants is because even tho global warming IS increasing co2 its not even close how much co2 was back then.
Theoretically we will eventually have huge plants but it will be along time and if the increase of co2 is steadily rising.
To say that plants evolved in a high CO2 environment is irrelevant, considering that they have adapted to the low CO2 atmosphere of today and climate change is predicted to occur rapidly like 20-100 years not millions of years. Certainly some plants will prosper but i don't believe you can base future inaction to a tent with 3 lemon trees in it.
@fatmike2000 Well, being that all plants react the same way to an influx of the vital nutrients and components they need for growth, we can say with 100% certainty that all forms of plant life will not only will the prosper, they will explode in growth.
On top of all that, the rain forests that we keep hearing about that are being cut down are perfectly suited to growing in a warm, humid, higher CO2 enviroment. They take advantage of the increased CO2 that is released at the forest floor.
@skisheavenly You're right ,it will only accelerate the growth, rising temperature will cause more ice and glaciers to melt, and will cause more water to evaporate, which will in turn bring more rain. So, the plant life will receive more of what it needs to grow. More CO2 + more H2O + higher temps, will create a more tropical atmosphere. Just like the conditions that created the abundance of plant life in the past we now enjoy in the form of coal.
This "fact" is called "photosynthesis". That's something your teacher desperately tried to teach you ... and now guys like you come up and think they discovered some secret facts that the liberals want to keep secret. So ridiculous.
As long as the plant has available light, water, and other fair environmental conditions that promote growth, the plant will use the CO2. Plants need all factors to be in place for optimal growth, just like humans. Man can survive up to 3 minutes without oxygen, 3 days without water, and 3 weeks without food. However, our growth is limited unless all needs are met at the same time.
If you can provide more CO2, then limiting factors are light levels, temps, micro nutrients, etc.
@HowToChangeTheWorld Yep, and CO2 has probably always been one of the limiting factors to plant growth, it is only a trace gas making up only 0.039% of the atmosphere. Most plants have an abundance of all the other factors, water, nutrients and ample sunlight. With increased evaporation, and rainfall dry areas will support more plant life.
@FaceGenital You know what you are talking about. I would love to see a climate change believer (nut) go and speak to a commercial greenhouse grower and try to explain how CO2 is such a bad thing. People who run greenhouses are in the business of creating artificial climates and know a thing or two about optimal growing conditions.
We have to stand up against Cap & Trade! Nothing violent, just push harder. Write your local paper, talk to your friends, and meet with people who agree with you and organize.
It all comes down to cost and benefits! Is the cost of destruction bigger from fire damage or from adaptation than the benefits from increased crop yield, biological activity, from increased fish stocks and timber?
Well let's not strip the Earth off it's CO2, we could just plant more plants and after all, a 'green' planet is what people are aiming for right? Forget about the wildfires, we actually need clean air and since plants absorb CO2, we need to plant more plants. The earth is never too enough to support plant life...But then again, those nuclear energies and weapons ruins our purpose for a "green planet"...
@sharinganx12 Actually, if there is more CO2 available to the plants, they become more eficient with their use of available water. This makes them more drought tolerant, as they retain more of their water, and allows the plant to handle higher light intensities. A shade plant might be able to thrive in full sun, for example. Search "water efficiency co2 transpiration," or something like that.
@sharinganx12 ACTUILY more C02= same amount of plants but bigger = more oxygen = which keeps our growing numbers alive. Wild fires... are the same your fucking stupid.
@sharinganx12, oxygen comprises about 20.95% of the atmosphere. If ALL the CO2 in the atmosphere were converted to oxygen and charcoal, then oxygen would comprise about 20.99% of the atmosphere (and all the plants would die). Nothing we do to atmospheric CO2 levels can have a significant effect on atmospheric oxygen levels.
@ncdave4life Our continued dumping of CO2 into the atmosphere is changing the planet...Might not affect the oxygen levels but that won't matter considering all the other changes it is doing & will do!
floats out the top? so you are admiting that you are purposly pumping co2 into the atmosphire? hmm...wonder who i can turn you into? anyone? Greenpeace? epa?
remember conditions(ie temp etc) other than the co2 levels is IDENTICAL in both chambers...but on a global scale conditions (ie temp etc) change and that is not being considered here...so its purely an expriment about effects of co2 in small chambers with IDENTICAL conditions but in the BIG real world conditions really matter and don't remain IDENTICAL.
just breathing fresh air isn't enough to have a healthy body...you also have to wear a jacket on a snowy day...or die in the cold breathing fresh air!....the concern is not just the increase of co2 but its cumilative effects in other arenas...one of them being temp.
That gas is only a killer in a confined space where the oxygen is running out. If you live in a house with a massive fermentation plant in the basement, CO2 asphyxiation MIGHT be a concern. It still wouldn't be a _killer_ gas, though. Perhaps you were thinking of carbon MON-oxide?
Some plants do better with more carbon dioxide, but plants also do better with more light. This does not, however, show us that they will achieve a NET benefit through an increase in any of these factors in any real world environment or ecosystem. For example, even if C02 went up, would there be enough water or nutrients?
Many, many studies have showed dramatically increased plant growth with elevated CO2 levels. A recent U of M 12yr study (Donald Zak) using mixed hardwood groves found that 570 ppm CO2 would result in an average 26% improvement in tree growth, even with phenotypes adjusted for current CO2 levels. Many greenhouse operators use CO2 generators to bump up CO2 to 1000 ppm or higher, because it makes plants grow much better. If you want to reduce third world hunger, emit more CO2!
ncdave4life 5 days ago
The UTTER STUPIDITY on display here is mind boggling!! One tree supposedly reacts better to increased CO2 in a closed system & many here think that means it would be just fine to create that experiment with the entire globe! WTF? That tree was not subjected to the warming that comes with increased CO2 either. Plus, many plants would react poorly to increased CO2 because they EVOLVED at the current levels & would not be able to adapt fast enough to cope with the rapid rise of CO2 we see today!!
Viracocha711 6 days ago
co2 is a verry widly used gas expecially in cannibis cultivation..
oneandonlydaddy 5 months ago
I still think the removal of plant ability to produce carbon dioxide, oxygen through the borate of alumina sprayed from chem trails is a direct intent to enforce a carbon tax fraud like climate enduced change through chem trails and the global warming fraud... the crops are being attacked for a reason... all monsanto business... a criminal fraud
MissEVitale 6 months ago
every 3rd degree kid knows this..
BUT if you do this on a bigger scale- (not to think about a experimental planetary.. global! scale!) you get problems.. lot of problems. Look into it without this bias and get real. Only talking about farmer stuff.. crops and so on. Not the general, global scale.. omg you guys are.. incredible.
EVEN if it would have totally positive aspects.. "co2=plant food.." (lol..) - what about ocean acidificaton? Ever heard of?
check reliable sources..
aerobique 6 months ago
@aerobique
I know I’m writing to a scientific illiterate people so arguing about CAGW and the push for a new energy poverty economy, the greatest scam in history leads nowhere. But, I find it amusing that you are upset of me pointing out that plants grow better in elevated levels of CO2, which is a fact and not controversial even among warmers.
PerStrand 6 months ago
@aerobique, a recent U of M paper about a larger-scale 12-year study found that increasing CO2 from ~380 ppm to ~570 ppm resulted in a 26% increase in tree growth.
Ocean acidifciation is a non-problem, too. There's nearly 50x as much CO2 in the oceans than in the atmosphere, so anthropogenic CO2 emissions can only slightly affect CO2 levels in the oceans, and thus can only slightly affect the pH of the oceans. For more info see barrettbellamyclimate(.)com(/)page50(.)htm
ncdave4life 3 months ago
@aerobique, ocean acidification is a red herring. The oceans are alkaline, not acid, and no amount of CO2 emissions can change that. Moreover, ocean pH varies considerably by location and depth, without harming marine life. Moreover, there's 50x as much CO2 dissolved in the oceans as there is in the air, so human CO2 emissions can't possibly have much long term effect on CO2 levels in the deep oceans.
ncdave4life 5 days ago
There is no right level of CO2 our bodys work like a fishes does under water it rips the oxygen out of the air the CO2 will help plants grow including produce and we will run out of things to burn. Lets face it fossil fuels come from dead things and in order for things to be dead they had to be living therfor there was no to much CO2 on this planet from the start and we will never die so any moran that thinks there is too much is fucking retarded.
sk8erpro10 6 months ago
Just growing trees isn't part of the Green agenda...taxing you to grow trees is.
FaceGenital 10 months ago
plants were huge when the dinosaurs were around because of the enriched co2 atmosphere, the reason we dont have abnormally giant plants is because even tho global warming IS increasing co2 its not even close how much co2 was back then.
Theoretically we will eventually have huge plants but it will be along time and if the increase of co2 is steadily rising.
CamaroHappy 1 year ago
Listen, if you like to keep your lawn nice and manicured.... believe in global warming
fattybastard2000 1 year ago
To say that plants evolved in a high CO2 environment is irrelevant, considering that they have adapted to the low CO2 atmosphere of today and climate change is predicted to occur rapidly like 20-100 years not millions of years. Certainly some plants will prosper but i don't believe you can base future inaction to a tent with 3 lemon trees in it.
fatmike2000 1 year ago
@fatmike2000 Well, being that all plants react the same way to an influx of the vital nutrients and components they need for growth, we can say with 100% certainty that all forms of plant life will not only will the prosper, they will explode in growth.
On top of all that, the rain forests that we keep hearing about that are being cut down are perfectly suited to growing in a warm, humid, higher CO2 enviroment. They take advantage of the increased CO2 that is released at the forest floor.
FaceGenital 10 months ago
Not if rainfall and temperature change
skisheavenly 1 year ago
@skisheavenly You're right ,it will only accelerate the growth, rising temperature will cause more ice and glaciers to melt, and will cause more water to evaporate, which will in turn bring more rain. So, the plant life will receive more of what it needs to grow. More CO2 + more H2O + higher temps, will create a more tropical atmosphere. Just like the conditions that created the abundance of plant life in the past we now enjoy in the form of coal.
FaceGenital 10 months ago
Sooo, global warming is a good thing?
brassflower 1 year ago
@brassflower there is no global warming, it is a fairy tale.
bylejaki34 1 year ago
This video shows that global warming is BS!!!! Do we have giant trees growing everywhere???
ThaBigSmoke 1 year ago
The liberals who want to 'control' all production in the world will not like these facts.
classicvox 1 year ago
@classicvox
This "fact" is called "photosynthesis". That's something your teacher desperately tried to teach you ... and now guys like you come up and think they discovered some secret facts that the liberals want to keep secret. So ridiculous.
blaufuss1 1 year ago
Q:
How long does the plant to absorb the CO2 available??
Any formula for that?
holm79 1 year ago
@holm79
As long as the plant has available light, water, and other fair environmental conditions that promote growth, the plant will use the CO2. Plants need all factors to be in place for optimal growth, just like humans. Man can survive up to 3 minutes without oxygen, 3 days without water, and 3 weeks without food. However, our growth is limited unless all needs are met at the same time.
If you can provide more CO2, then limiting factors are light levels, temps, micro nutrients, etc.
HowToChangeTheWorld 1 year ago
@HowToChangeTheWorld Yep, and CO2 has probably always been one of the limiting factors to plant growth, it is only a trace gas making up only 0.039% of the atmosphere. Most plants have an abundance of all the other factors, water, nutrients and ample sunlight. With increased evaporation, and rainfall dry areas will support more plant life.
FaceGenital 10 months ago
@FaceGenital You know what you are talking about. I would love to see a climate change believer (nut) go and speak to a commercial greenhouse grower and try to explain how CO2 is such a bad thing. People who run greenhouses are in the business of creating artificial climates and know a thing or two about optimal growing conditions.
HowToChangeTheWorld 10 months ago
@holm79 6CO2 + 6 H2O = C6H12O6 + 6O2
Carbon plus water plus sunlight equals Glucose and breathable oxygen.
Plants have been keeping animals live for hundreds of millions of years.
FaceGenital 10 months ago
if you put humans in a place with double the oxygen maybe they will grow twice as big
Milkcartinor 2 years ago
@Milkcartinor
s8int d0t com/giants1.html
je24t2 7 months ago
We have to stand up against Cap & Trade! Nothing violent, just push harder. Write your local paper, talk to your friends, and meet with people who agree with you and organize.
OOhU2A 2 years ago 2
Think about it, more CO2=more plants=more oxygen=more wildfires...
sharinganx12 2 years ago
Youre right! How to fix this!
Remove the CO2=no plant life=no wildfire=problem solved=no life
PerStrand 2 years ago 13
On a more seriously note. What is the right level of CO2? Should we try to control it, wrecking havoc in the economy and for people?
PerStrand 2 years ago 7
It all comes down to cost and benefits! Is the cost of destruction bigger from fire damage or from adaptation than the benefits from increased crop yield, biological activity, from increased fish stocks and timber?
PerStrand 2 years ago
Well let's not strip the Earth off it's CO2, we could just plant more plants and after all, a 'green' planet is what people are aiming for right? Forget about the wildfires, we actually need clean air and since plants absorb CO2, we need to plant more plants. The earth is never too enough to support plant life...But then again, those nuclear energies and weapons ruins our purpose for a "green planet"...
sharinganx12 2 years ago
that is a stupid way of thinking. wild fires are natures way of keeping the balance and natuaral creating co2
chozenone111 2 years ago
@sharinganx12 Actually, if there is more CO2 available to the plants, they become more eficient with their use of available water. This makes them more drought tolerant, as they retain more of their water, and allows the plant to handle higher light intensities. A shade plant might be able to thrive in full sun, for example. Search "water efficiency co2 transpiration," or something like that.
HowToChangeTheWorld 1 year ago
@sharinganx12 nigga you just went full retarded
bigsly 1 year ago
@sharinganx12 dumbass
l2pks4f3rs 9 months ago
@l2pks4f3rs are you fucking serious? This was over 2 years ago. Get a fucking sense! I have no time for this anymore.... >_<
sharinganx12 9 months ago
@sharinganx12 ACTUILY more C02= same amount of plants but bigger = more oxygen = which keeps our growing numbers alive. Wild fires... are the same your fucking stupid.
sk8erpro10 6 months ago
@sharinganx12, oxygen comprises about 20.95% of the atmosphere. If ALL the CO2 in the atmosphere were converted to oxygen and charcoal, then oxygen would comprise about 20.99% of the atmosphere (and all the plants would die). Nothing we do to atmospheric CO2 levels can have a significant effect on atmospheric oxygen levels.
ncdave4life 3 months ago
@ncdave4life Our continued dumping of CO2 into the atmosphere is changing the planet...Might not affect the oxygen levels but that won't matter considering all the other changes it is doing & will do!
Viracocha711 6 days ago
floats out the top? so you are admiting that you are purposly pumping co2 into the atmosphire? hmm...wonder who i can turn you into? anyone? Greenpeace? epa?
dexxtteer 3 years ago
remember conditions(ie temp etc) other than the co2 levels is IDENTICAL in both chambers...but on a global scale conditions (ie temp etc) change and that is not being considered here...so its purely an expriment about effects of co2 in small chambers with IDENTICAL conditions but in the BIG real world conditions really matter and don't remain IDENTICAL.
Sammythesupersnail 3 years ago
just breathing fresh air isn't enough to have a healthy body...you also have to wear a jacket on a snowy day...or die in the cold breathing fresh air!....the concern is not just the increase of co2 but its cumilative effects in other arenas...one of them being temp.
Sammythesupersnail 3 years ago
My real concern is for the guy's safety! He's just walking around that enclosure full of killer gas without any protection.
reggie1296 3 years ago
That gas is only a killer in a confined space where the oxygen is running out. If you live in a house with a massive fermentation plant in the basement, CO2 asphyxiation MIGHT be a concern. It still wouldn't be a _killer_ gas, though. Perhaps you were thinking of carbon MON-oxide?
kaloalex 3 years ago
peopel alway mistake the two.
chozenone111 2 years ago
This also shows that if we hadn't been burning FF since the 19th century, plant growth would be slower today, as CO2 would still be 280 ppm.
PS. He should keep his hands on the wheel.
SteveWrathall 4 years ago
Some plants do better with more carbon dioxide, but plants also do better with more light. This does not, however, show us that they will achieve a NET benefit through an increase in any of these factors in any real world environment or ecosystem. For example, even if C02 went up, would there be enough water or nutrients?
BeachofDreams 4 years ago