Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Higher levels of atmospheric CO2 is reducing the zinc, iron, and protein in rice, wheat, soybeans, and peas, the crops that sustain a significant part of humanity. Just thought you should know.
To those who know absolutely about plants I guess. Do know why corn grows so well? Its a C4 plant. Know what they do in green houses?
I would not suggest we can just blow all caution to the wind, but its actually good news . We are probably on the low side of CO2. At higher levels it will be easier to sequester if necessary.
Higher levels of atmospheric CO2 is reducing the zinc, iron, and protein in rice, wheat, soybeans, and peas, the crops that sustain a significant part of humanity. Just thought you should know.
The first thing we should know, is whether it's true that CO2 has such an effect.
Too bad you didn't support your allegation with any evidence at all.
Higher levels of atmospheric CO2 is reducing the zinc, iron, and protein in rice, wheat, soybeans, and peas, the crops that sustain a significant part of humanity. Just thought you should know.
Higher levels of CO2 have little to do with it. Its being reduced in the soils from constant agriculture. That's why I eat the weeds and use wood ash etc.
So... we need to alter the climate so plants can grow better despite all the unknown consequences....
Comments that begin with "so" are usually such worthless, straw man crap.
Quote:
What’s your overall point? That the benefits outweigh the costs?
My point is it not a big environmental problem, at least in the near term. Plants will suck up and sequester CO2 at a much higher rate. Making plant grow more easily is also a benefit Although being able to control CO2 levels is probably important. Hard to say what the best PPM is for humans but the current level is actually at the threshold of plant starvation. Its historically low. If it were not for animals, they would be in serious trouble. Plants already poisoned the earth, and have asphyxiated themselves in the past with not enough free CO2. Well not really plants but Cyanobacteria.
But again we should control CO2 as soon as we can. However there is no reason to just think what it is now is ideal.
Anyway I'd rather concentrate on heavy metals, plastics and PCBs etc. I would also like to slap tariffs on China until they do something about their smog. Why is moving the problem the solution?
Gotta love all the climate deniers backing CO2, yet not a single mention of the fact that CO2 absorbs and subsequently re-radiates infrared energy back into our atmosphere, AMPLIFYING the greenhouse effect.
Last edited by subaru5555; 05-21-2018 at 04:27 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
