Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Socialistlemur

(770 posts)
4. I don't think so
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 03:42 PM
Jun 2013

It's a complicated balancing act. We get co2 and water when we burn fossil fuels (and minor amounts of nasties). The oxygen is used in this process. Then plants grow from water Co2 and minor amounts of key minerals (fertilizers), so we have biomass created. In a sense the fossil fuels become biomass. I can confirm the observations, there was a large increase in vegetation cover but lately it's not happening because the world isn't warming either. Temperatures flattened out about 12 years ago. I just finished reading a report which says a lot of the growth is new forest growing in the far north.

I have to finish reading what I'm reading but it shows some really interesting trends as a result of the warming and increased CO2 levels. In general we will see more humidity, more plant growth (limited by nutrient), a slight increase in temperature and definitely less ice in the Arctic. But the Antarctic will be less impacted. Stay tuned.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Elevated carbon dioxide m...»Reply #4