Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Demonizing Carbon
I recently came across this exceedingly excellent article written by a long-time acquaintance of mine, where he decries the popular effort to demonize carbon in the atmosphere.

What is Driving the Strategy to Demonize the Most Amazing, Life Sustaining Element?

Robert D. Brinsmead

Irenic Publications
September 2018
[Following are excerpts:]
Quote:Growers who operate indoor greenhouses to raise crops such as tomatoes and flowers now prove the benefits of carbon dioxide enrichment on a daily basis. By raising carbon dioxide levels by up to 300% (1,200 ppm) they raise the volume of their tomato harvests by about 40% without any further inputs.
The world is now growing more food than ever and despite the population growth of another billion people in the last 25 years, the percentage of people not getting enough food is the lowest it has ever been. During the last 25 years carbon dioxide levels of the atmosphere have risen by 11%, and this has boosted food production by about the same amount. That extra carbon dioxide is feeding an extra billion people.
“our present Pleistocene Era, these carbon dioxide levels have been limping along barely above a level where plants would starve. On the other hand, if present carbon dioxide levels were doubled, all plant life would thrive and crop yields would receive a massive boost.”
“By analyzing NASA satellite data with high resolution imaging technology, they found that the earth had greened by 14% in the 30 years from 1980 to 2011. They said that the expansion of green areas were as large as 2 continental USA’s. That’s also double the size of Australia.To what did the researchers credit these astonishing gains? They estimated that 9% was due to more nitrogen, 8% was due to global warming, 4% was due to land change, but a whopping 70% Was due to more aerial carbon dioxide.”
“According to the Satellites that measure temperatures (UAH and GISS) there has been little or no statistically significant [exceeding 0.2°] temperature gains for 20 years even though carbon dioxide levels have increased by about 11% over that period.”
“Over an entire generation, the public has been bombarded with scary scenarios of climate catastrophes, none of which have happened. We were told that the Arctic would be free of ice by 2013. It hasn’t happened.The UN warned that by the year 2010 there would be 50 million climate refugees. There’s not even been one."
“They said the polar bears would disappear. They’ve doubled in numbers since the scare mongering started. The experts said that global warming would reduce agricultural yields. There have been world record harvests instead.”
"The only rational conclusion we can draw from all the evidence is that man-made carbon dioxide Emissions are good for the planet and for all life upon it. Increased carbon dioxide emissions are giving us more food and a greener earth. They are making it a little warmer at night, a little warmer in winter and a little warmer in those cooler regions where it is needed most. Their overall impact on human health is very positive.”
“According to Patrick Moore PhD. (Ecology), the optimum atmospheric carbon dioxide level for plants is somewhere between 1,000 and 2,000 ppm. This is indicated by thousands of trials and also by the wide use of carbon dioxide to boost plant yields in indoor greenhouses.”
By digging up the hydrocarbons buried in the earth, mankind is not proving itself to be the one rogue species that destroys the earth. Rather, by replenishing those depleted aerial carbon dioxide levels, mankind is proving to be the only species which can arrest the dangerous decline of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
If the thesis of this paper is correct –
that carbon dioxide emissions are highly beneficial rather than harmful,
that carbon dioxide emissions are not just another plant food but the primary plant food,
that carbon dioxide emissions have raised world food production from 10-15%,
that reducing aerial carbon dioxide levels could starve a billion people,
that rising carbon dioxide levels are dramatically greening the earth,
that aerial carbon dioxide levels are a long way from reaching optimum levels,
that reducing the carbon dioxide fertilization of plants would sabotage the “Green Revolution” this century just as reducing nitrogen fertilization would have sabotaged the Green Revolution last century,
Then the only conclusion we can come to is that more carbon dioxide emissions are needed rather than less.

We can exhale again.

I know you think you understand what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)