Greenkama

Does more CO₂ make the earth greener and better?

According to a NASA article, the more CO₂ there is in the atmosphere, the greener the earth becomes, but is that a good thing?

Author: Ralf Nowotny

We received these sharepics as a comment on an article, according to which the increase in CO₂ is rather good for the earth:

Does more CO2 make the earth greener and better?
Does more CO2 make the earth greener and better?

The text on the more detailed sharepic reads:

“A climate movement is resisting the greening of the earth.
NASA study from 2016
CO2 is the cause of more growth.
The more CO2 – the greener the earth

Without carbon dioxide there would be no life, as plants need not only light but also CO2 for photosynthesis to grow.
This biological law forms the basis for life. (CO2 for assimilation in plants)”

What kind of NASA study is this?

The NASA article mentioned in the sharepics actually exists and can be found here ! It reports studies that have shown that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide increase photosynthesis and stimulate plant growth. Carbon dioxide fertilization explains 70 percent of the greening effect, followed by nitrogen at 9 percent.

However, this is not a NASA study; they only published an article about it; the study itself can be found Nature Apart from this small flaw, the statements are correct so far.

What the Sharepic hides

Unfortunately, the creators of the Sharepics apparently didn't read the entire NASA article or deliberately missed an important paragraph, because it also says:

Increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide in the air can be beneficial for plants, but they are also the main culprit for climate change. The gas that traps heat in Earth's atmosphere has been increasing since the industrial era through the burning of oil, gas, coal and wood for energy, and continues to reach concentrations not seen in at least 500,000 years. The impacts of climate change include global warming, rising sea levels, melting glaciers and sea ice, and more severe weather events.”

But a lot of green is good, right?

Not in the long term, and especially not for people !
In 2017, the environmental scientist Dr. Elliott Campbell from the University of California another study that basically says the same thing, but also provides numbers: According to this, 31 percent more carbon dioxide is now converted into organic matter than before the industrial revolution.

Climate change deniers immediately jumped on this study, declaring that “ so-called carbon pollution has actually done more for the Earth’s greenery than the entire climate policies of all the world’s governments combined .”

The New York Times then conducted an interview with Dr. Campbell, who is not at all enthusiastic about this interpretation of his study by climate deniers, as incorrect conclusions are drawn from it. To this end, Dr. Campell four reasons why “Global Greening” shouldn’t really be celebrated:

1. More photosynthesis does not mean more food

Although we actually harvest more food now than we did a century ago, the increase in CO₂ has very little to do with this. Like Dr. Campbell says 30 percent more photosynthesis doesn't mean 30 percent more strawberries in the field.

Although photosynthesis by plants removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, at night the process works exactly the opposite: a large part of the CO2 absorbed by the plants is released back into the air. So this doesn't really have any more benefit for the plants, so the increase in food over the last century is not due to the increased proportion of CO₂, but rather to better fertilizers, better types of seeds and more effective irrigation.

2. The extra CO₂ can make plants less nutritious

A number of studies show that plants grown in environments with higher CO₂ levels often contain lower concentrations of nutrients such as nitrogen, copper and potassium. Why this is the case is still being investigated; a study by the University of Gothenburg in Sweden that certain microbes are not innocent.

Just as carbon dioxide speeds up photosynthesis, it can also increase the rate at which soil microbes absorb nutrients, allowing plants to absorb less through their roots, scientists suggest.

And that's the problem: If our food becomes less nutritious, we also become more susceptible to disease. To shed more light on this, a team of researchers from Stanford University examined how future changes in crop nutrient content affect health.

The results were worrying: iron deficiency in Southeast Asia, for example, would rise from 21.8 percent to 27.9 percent by 2050. Globally, nutrient deficiencies in crops would lead to much greater susceptibility to malaria and pneumonia, which in turn leads to premature deaths.

3. More plants does not prevent climate change

Not only crops, but also forests, meadows and other ecosystems absorb carbon dioxide and release most of it at night. It is estimated that all of the world's plants and ecosystems combined could remove about 25 percent of the carbon dioxide we put into the atmosphere.

But now more power plants are being built every year and more CO₂ is being produced, so even more plants cannot stop this. It's a bit like a doctor telling you that chemotherapy has slowed the growth of the tumor by 25 percent: it only slows down the process in the best case scenario, but neither stops it completely nor reverses it.

4. “Global Greening” will not last forever

It is still unclear how strong the current effect will last. If, for example, climate change also changes precipitation patterns and temperatures, it may happen that the plants no longer absorb any additional CO₂ and, on the contrary, release more than 75 percent back into the air, which would then make the situation even worse.

Conclusion

The Sharepic's statement that the world is becoming greener due to climate change is true. However, the conclusion that this would make things better is wrong: “Global Greening” only has optical advantages, but in the long term it is rather bad for humanity.

Article image: Shutterstock / By Johan Swanepoel

Also interesting:

Fact check: The CO₂ content of the atmosphere in 1890

Climate change and CO₂: The Sharepic with the numbers game!

Robert I's questions to the climate protectors

Subscribe to our WhatsApp channel via link or QR scan! Activate the small 🔔 and receive a current news overview as well as exciting fact checks .

Link: Mimikama's WhatsApp channel

Mimikama WhatsApp channel

Notes:

1) This content reflects the current state of affairs at the time of publication
.
The reproduction of individual images, screenshots, embeds or video sequences serves to discuss the topic. 2) Individual articles (not fact checks) were created using machine help and
were carefully checked by the Mimikama editorial team before publication. ( Reason )


With your help, you support one of the most important independent sources of information on the subject of fake news and consumer protection in German-speaking countries

Are you concerned about misinformation online? Mimikama is committed to a fact-based and safe internet. Your support allows us to continue to ensure quality and authenticity online. Please support and help us create a trustworthy digital environment. Your support counts! You too can become an ambassador for Mimikama

More from Greenkama