Sure, if you let the plants grow at a pace that matches your co2 output.
(We’re not doing that)
Sure, if you let the plants grow at a pace that matches your co2 output.
(We’re not doing that)
"Uh, water is essential to all life, so, like, I think you're really overreacting about this flood."
The simple science is that plants do grow in heavier CO2 environments, sometimes very well. But they grow differently, which is a problem for food plants, because they don't produce what we want from them as food unless we also add heavy nutrients and water. In a greenhouse environment, this can increase production. In the outside, it's far more difficult to get good results.
So they aren't wrong, they just don't understand the bigger picture. Change one thing, other things change too, not always in the direction you want.
Pro tip: east the plants, then bury their babies in the resulting excrement. Profit!?
I think it was the Incans or Mayans that lived in a community of raised huts, shat from above into an area underneath & moved the village over when it started to stink. Then they'd plant seeds in the cleared fertile areas. Simple, efficient & brilliant.. until it wasn't anymore. Disease or Spaniards or a combination of the two, it ended up jungle again with little left to see other than mostly soil-science and foundational markings.
ironically eating meat is one of the biggest contributors of global warming
If CO2 was thick enough at ground level, where plants grow, we'd be feeling it. We don't have low O2 sensors, we have high CO2 sensors. Humans can happily suffocate and not notice as long as they can expel breath.
all 24 comments