Trees growing faster

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
10,610
Location
Las Vegas NV
Quote:
A study by the University of Leeds, published in the science journal Nature, measured the girth of 70,000 trees across 10 African countries and compared them with similar records made four decades ago.

On average, the trees were getting bigger faster and researchers found that each hectare of African forest was trapping an extra 0.6 tons of CO2 a year compared with the 1960s.

If this is replicated across the world's tropical rainforests they would be removing nearly 5 billion tons of CO2 a year from the atmosphere.

Scientists have been looking for a similar impact on crop yields and the experiments generally suggest that raised CO2 levels would boost the yields of mainstream crops, such as maize, rice and soy, by about 13 per cent.

Professor Martin Parry, head of plant science at Rothamsted Research, Britain's leading crop institute, said: "There is no doubt that the enrichment of the air with CO2 is increasing plant growth rates in many areas.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environ...al-warming.html
 
5 Billion Tons less in the air...?

Ahhhhhhhhh, that's a big weight off our shoulders.
 
Originally Posted By: ToyotaNSaturn
The earth takes care of itself. Who knew?!?



grin2.gif
 
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Limited+st...ake-a0145389255

Quote:
Plants take carbon dioxide carbon dioxide, chemical compound, CO2, a colorless, odorless, tasteless gas that is about one and one-half times as dense as air under ordinary conditions of temperature and pressure. out of Earth's atmosphere “Air” redirects here. For other uses, see Air (disambiguation).

Earth's atmosphere is a layer of gases surrounding the planet Earth and retained by the Earth's gravity. It contains roughly (by molar content/volume) 78% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0. and use its carbon to promote their growth. However, if human activities continue to increase atmospheric concentrations of the planet-warming gas, vegetation won't sequester sequester v. to keep separate or apart. In so-called "high-profile" criminal prosecutions (involving major crimes, events, or persons given wide publicity) the jury is sometimes "sequestered" in a hotel without access to news media, the general public or their large amounts of carbon dioxide in the long term, two new analyses suggest. That's because plants will quickly run out of other nutrients.

In the short term, plants store carbon in their tissues. Eventually, some of that carbon makes its way into the soil through the roots or via fallen leaves and stems. Those phenomena had raised the possibility that plants would decrease the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Lab and field experiments had shown that plants grow more quickly in the presence of higher-than-normal concentrations of carbon dioxide in the air, says Peter B. Reich, an ecologist at the University of Minnesota(body, education) University of Minnesota - The home of Gopher.

In their 6-year study, the researchers measured carbon storage in nearly 300 patches of Minnesota grassland cultivated under various conditions. Some plots were exposed to an atmosphere with 50 percent more carbon dioxide than the current concentration, some received extra nitrogen via fertilizer, some received both treatments, and others received neither. The plots contained between 1 and 16 species of grasses, herbs, wildflowers, and legumes, a family of plants that bear edible seeds in pods, including beans and peas.

As expected, for the first 4 years of the experiment, plants exposed to higher-than-normal concentrations of carbon dioxide grew faster and became larger than those that didn't get extra carbon, says Reich. However, unless they were also receiving nitrogen supplements, growth of such plants slowed substantially in the fifth and sixth years of the experiment. Reich and his colleagues report their findings in the April 13 Nature.
 
Tempest,

Greenhouse growers have been using CO2 generators to speed up plant growth for many years. We use them at my workplace.
Try googling greenhouse C02 enrichment.

However, this is the first time I have heard of this effect in regards to the "big greenhouse". To be honest, I am rather dumbfounded that it hasn't brought to our attention sooner.

Thanks for sharing.
 
I would guess that we would have to slow down the large scale rain forest destruction (among other things) before the graph levels off.
 
Originally Posted By: eljefino
So when are the trees really going to start working and level this graph off?

Or this one:
law-dome.gif

Shows a little longer trend.
Quote:
There is no "pre-industrial" equilibrium carbon dioxide concentration. There was variability in the order of 10ppmv between 1006 and 1800. It is therefore not possible to calculate the forcing due to presumed combustion of fossil fuels by subtracting a presumed past equilibrium value from the current value.

There was a marked fall of about 9ppmv in carbon dioxide concentration during the period of the "Little Ice Age" (about 1550 to 1850) with a period of very slow growth from 1800 to 1850. The authors are of the opinion that this fall in carbon dioxide concentration was caused by the fall in temperature, rather than the other way about. The carbon dioxide concentration in the period after 1850, extending into this century would be influenced by recovery from the Little Ice Age..

Between 1935 and 1945 the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration was constant, or even declined slightly. The reason for this is unknown.

The measurements fit well with the modern results from the South Pole, but the whole record, particularly the recent modern one, does not follow an exponential curve, fossil fuel emissions, or comply with any of the current models, (Enting and Lassey 1993) which were used as a basis for future projections by the IPCC

Quote:
background carbon dioxide as measured at remote sites has been increasing in the atmosphere at an almost linear rate of about 1.4ppmv per year ever since 1972. The rate seems to be unaffected by the large increase in emissions form combustion of fossil fuels over the period (4.4Gt in 1972 to 6.4Gt in 1995, an increase of 45%).

http://www.john-daly.com/bull120.htm
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Would be nice if the graph started at zero rather than 270.


But then it wouldn't have the impact they're looking for.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Would be nice if the graph started at zero rather than 270.

I agree. Virtually all of the charts on line are like those above. I did find one a little better:
co2ml407.gif
 
If that chart started at year zero or the beginning of recorded history the last little tick would be pretty steep.
LOL.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom