The Actual Science Behind CO2Myth
Let’s just start with the most glaringly obvious issue with the theory that increasing CO2 is good for the environment, well, aside from the fact that the whole thing seems to be initiated by a politician with a BS in Home Economics. We will just assume that there are no other factors involved aside from the issue at hand. After all, we are trying to convince people who obviously have a problem seeing beyond stage one.
Suppose it was true that CO2 is the savior to our deforestation issues, and all plants, not just some, will experience unlimited, continuous growth if we increase our emissions. As we mentioned earlier, the other big thing plants need in water. It is safe to say that the bigger plants get, the more water they will need. Experiments in my own backyard would prove that (because I am poor at watering, unfortunately). With gigantic trees and plants growing increasingly faster, I wonder where we are going to get all of this fresh water to keep them irrigated? Because we don’t have droughts all over the world already or anything. Not to mention, CO2 concentration is one variable that is undisputedly linked to temperature, so the extra heat caused from our extra emissions isn’t going to help.
Next, too much CO2 is not good. Many plant types are not able to photosynthesize when CO2 levels are elevated. We would have far less of a variety to enjoy, much less eat. Some of the crops that we enjoy would also experience changes in production. Wheat, for instance, is a crop that has been found to lose nutritional value in elevated CO2 levels.
And what about other things that a plant needs to grow? What happens when we have more CO2 than those things, like water or soil nutrients? A long-term study from nature.com is evidence that along with elevated CO2, comes depleted nitrogen levels in the soil. This means that we will need to fertilize the soil as well as elevate our CO2 levels. Fertilizer production is a very energy intensive, byproduct laden process which also has very negative impacts on ground water contamination. So even if we wanted to ignore everything else, elevating CO2 emissions would result in non-sustainable crop growth. At least we would enjoy it while it as abundant, right?
What next? Let’s forget about water, and the need for fertilizer and additives to keep the plants healthy. Let’s forget about the heating of the earth as a result of doubling our emissions. What would be the next concern about these giant non-sustainable plants? Simple, what the hell are we going to do about the giant ass bugs that these plants would attract? Inevitably, the larger the plant the bigger the bug, right? How are we going to fight them off? Would we have to adapt to life while in the presence of dinosaur-like insects?
Okay, so the last one was a joke; but no less real than the claims made by our honorable clowns in political office (Tennessee Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn and Utah State Representative Jerry Anderson). If they are right, and nothing before that last paragraph convinced you that they aren’t, then the last paragraph will certainly work for you. It too isolates a single fact and grossly embellishes it, thus clearly falling in line with the accepted line of thought.
On a final and more serious note, these claims that we need to increase our CO2 emissions are irresponsible and reckless. Let us not be fooled into more mistakes, or our grandchildren will pay the price.