[ethor]

Wouldn't an increase in co2 in the atmosphere spur a massive plant growth, both on land and in the oceans? I have no qualifications nor merit in this field as well, so anyone please feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

[swader999]

Yes it already has. Earth has greened considerably, agriculture, forests have all been boosted the last forty years.

Here chat 4:

Piao, S., Liu, Z., Wang, Y. et al. (2020). Plant phenology and global climate change: Current progresses and challenges. Global Change Biology, 26, 1928–1940. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15004 This review paper discusses the impact of global climate change on plant phenology, which includes effects of elevated CO2 levels.

Zhu, Z., Piao, S., Myneni, R. B., Huang, M., Zeng, Z., Canadell, J. G., ... & Zeng, N. (2016). Greening of the Earth and its drivers. Nature Climate Change, 6(8), 791-795. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3004 This article provides evidence for the 'greening' of the Earth over a period of 33 years, attributing roughly 70% of this greening to increased atmospheric CO2.

Smith, P., House, J. I., Bustamante, M., Sobocká, J., Harper, R., Pan, G., ... & Popp, A. (2016). Global change pressures on soils from land use and management. Global Change Biology, 22(3), 1008-1028. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13068 This article discusses the effects of global change pressures on soils, including the impacts of increasing CO2.

[q87b]

Just to makes sure no one things that this means that extra CO2 is good because of this: Elevated CO2 levels drastically change the climate and will make Earth inhabitable for humans at some point if not reduced. It's good for some plants in some places but their growth does not fix the underlying and future issues with CO2 in our atmosphere.

[ajnin]

It probably would, but if you're implying this would absorb a lot of CO2, I don't think so, plants die and when they do they decompose and release the CO2 back into the atmosphere. The conditions are not really met for a new carboniferous era right now and it took millions of years.

[revelio]

No because plant levels settle at a higher equilibrium. Plants may decompose but there are more plants growing at the same time, so it still ends up being more.

Higher CO2 levels are said to have led to a "global greening", in which crop yields have gone up a lot. This is especially true in Africa, so that reduces global hunger and increases wealth. The idea that more CO2 = less life is not as simple as it's made out to be. Climate doomers ignores this type of thing because they are convinced society can't handle complexity, so have to insist that CO2 is always bad even when it's not.

https://fee.org/articles/rejoice-the-earth-is-becoming-green...

[dalbasal]

... ideally, during a carboniferous epoch, you have lots of bogs and places where plants can decompose into oil for future civilizations to enjoy... And re-release I to the atmosphere.

[icegreentea2]

Yes, we expect increased some degree of photosynthesis. However, we hardly expect to see an proportionate increase of photosynthesis (or plant mass?) - if nothing else, we'd expect there to still be a bottleneck from nitrogen.

[Mizza]

Some, but most plant growth is nitrogen limited, not CO2 limited.

[danielheath]

Depends whether that's a bottleneck; hard to imagine much improvement in a plant that's short of nitrogen.

[csomar]

Logically, yes. The energy will be transformed by nature if humans don't do it. However, this might not happen in a timely fashion for us to survive as a specie. Remember, earth timelines are wildly different than human ones.

[nomel]

> for us to survive as a species

An incredibly strong feedback mechanism exists (see article above).

Societal problems, yes. Extinction to the human species? I think that’s extreme hyperbole. What would the mechanism even be, to eradicate all humans, across the globe?

Climate change is real, things will be bad, etc, but the possible end of the species is an incredible claim, that doesn’t follow logic.

[sharemywin]

wouldn't the models already take that into account? I thought we were having problems with deforestation also.

[m0llusk]

Yes, but in the worst way. Giving large amounts of CO2 to plants is kind of like giving huge doses of steroids to athletes. They grow abnormally and become unhealthy and short lived.

[JudasGoat]

My cannabis plants flower with 15 to 20% yield improvement and no abnormalities at 1500ppm CO2. Edit One of the side effects of CO2 infusion ironically, is tolerance of higher temperatures.