By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Earth is rapidly greening because of CO2 fertilization (NASA study)

CaptainExplosion said:
SvennoJ said:
Oh great, more grass to mow, which is one of the contributors to rising CO2 levels, a self reinforcing loop!

Couldn't you just, you know, not mow it?

I'm all for it, yet it seems to be part of the Canadian citizenship duties. Can't have the lawn looking anything other than Wimbledon stadium ready! Summer here is the sound of lawnmowers.



Around the Network
betacon said:
GProgrammer said:

No, this actually supports what he has been saying

Al Gore has done nothing but spread bullshit propaganda about the affects of global warming, one of the biggest danger to his own cause. The less people hear from that moron the better.

You don't believe Al Gore but ManBearPig is real and he will eat innocent children if we don't stop him, ManBearPig is real man!




Twitter @CyberMalistix

CaptainExplosion said:
Qwark said:

Well organisms do adapt to climate change, this one is a little different. Mainly due to the speed of the change. There are species which already have evolved the last decade to addapt and have a thicker shell than a few decades ago. Although it also makes them slower so it's a trade-off.

Anyway its a combination off all things which will cause massive damage to the seas. Algae bloom caused by over fertilisation doesnt help either, since the algea neccesary to build coral compete with other weeds and algea.

Fishing also severely damages coral reefs and the effect of microplastics and pesticides/chemical dumps in the ocean probably isn't helping either. However acidification does stack since corals recover faster the higher the Ph value of the waters.

Although the rate the ocean is acidifying and the climate changing has pretty much never occurred, outside of other mass extinction events such as when the asteroid stirked which eliminated the dinosaur and the aftermath of that event. The corals might survive the acidification, although large reefs are already severly damaged, especially in the Caribbean area.

So in the end acidification alone might ir might not let corals go extinct. We simply don't know because of the current rate of climate change and accidfication is way faster than before and evolution, as effictive as it is fir organisms to addapt to extreme conditions needs a lot of time.

So while accidification even at the current rate alone might not be enough to nake coral reefs go extinct. Its pretty safe to assume it makes reefs more vulnerable and that might just be enough to lower the tipping point of no return low enough for all the other cap we do, for us to surpass that tipping point.

 

Although I would rather not take chances of losing any major reef because off acidification. Bleaching is still a major issue for a big part of the great barrier reef, along with an abbundance of plastic and nutrients. Over fishing is somewhat controlled in Australia.

What's a good way to stop coral bleaching?

Well the best way is to decrease the amount of CO2 emission and to decrease the emission of acidic compounds.

You can fight the symptoms of coral bleaching by either mixing cold with hot water in the oceans to cool the water, so that the algea (zoöxanthelle) that give coral color have a better habitat. Australia is investing 2.2 billion in big mixers. Decreasing wastewater and chemical waste dumps in oceans in feneral also makes the habit better for Corals and the Algea, so that wouldn't hurt either.

Adding more calcium to the water also works, since calciumcarbonate increases the pH, but you would need the entire coast of dover multiple times. So cutting fossil fuels is really the best way we have.

 

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/there-s-only-one-way-save-great-barrier-reef-scientists-conclude

 

https://www.google.nl/amp/s/www.popsci.com/amp/coral-bleaching-water-pipeline



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

CaptainExplosion said:
Qwark said:

Well the best way is to decrease the amount of CO2 emission and to decrease the emission of acidic compounds.

You can fight the symptoms of coral bleaching by either mixing cold with hot water in the oceans to cool the water, so that the algea (zoöxanthelle) that give coral color have a better habitat. Australia is investing 2.2 billion in big mixers. Decreasing wastewater and chemical waste dumps in oceans in feneral also makes the habit better for Corals and the Algea, so that wouldn't hurt either.

Adding more calcium to the water also works, since calciumcarbonate increases the pH, but you would need the entire coast of dover multiple times. So cutting fossil fuels is really the best way we have.

 

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/there-s-only-one-way-save-great-barrier-reef-scientists-conclude

 

https://www.google.nl/amp/s/www.popsci.com/amp/coral-bleaching-water-pipeline

That's what I thought. Kill the fossil fuels! ^^

And speaking of algae plumes, could we harvest the algae as a fuel source? I've heard of it being done.

You can win bio oil from Algae, from which you can make plastics, fuels and other carbohydrates. Some algae also produce hydrogen under some circumstances.

 

https://www.google.nl/amp/s/phys.org/news/2016-10-green-hydrogen-production-algal-proteins.amp

 

In theory you could use over fertilised water around farms to grow algae in. The algea use the nutrients and using a biorefinery you can win the nutrients back and other compounds like bio oil back. The  clean defertilised water, could be injected into the local water system, making that cleaner as a result.



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

fatslob-:O said:

He pretty much explains why earth is a long way from runaway greenhouse warming like Venus is and also explains the benefit that CO2 emissions bring in such as higher crop yields so I guess ~1000 ppm of CO2 is ideal for plant life ... (need to at least double the CO2 concentration)

Does he account for the impact higher temperatures might have on crop yields as well as effect on water supplies?



Around the Network
KLAMarine said:

Does he account for the impact higher temperatures might have on crop yields as well as effect on water supplies?

An independent research shows that plants prefer warmer temperatures too and according to Gardner's Supply Company's data most crops can handle a temperature of up to 35 degrees Celsius ...

As far as water supply goes, NASA has shown that Earth overall is greening so there is most likely no discernible negative effect either on soil moisture ... 

We could use that land from Canada, Northern Europe and Russia so that we could feed more people AND feed them more desirable crops too while we're at it! C'mon, we could end world hunger a whole lot sooner if we raised temperatures and CO2 concentrations just a bit ...  

Last edited by fatslob-:O - on 28 February 2018