Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hatrack

(59,587 posts)
Wed Sep 7, 2016, 07:54 AM Sep 2016

17-Year Study Providing High CO2 Levels, Heat To Mixed Plant Communities Ends; Does Not End Well

Oops.

Los Angeles — In the course of a 17-year experiment on more than 1 million plants, scientists put future global warming to a real world test — growing California flowers and grasslands with extra heat, carbon dioxide and nitrogen to mimic a not-so-distant, hotter future. The results, simulating a post-2050 world, aren't pretty. And they contradict those who insist that because plants like carbon dioxide — the main heat-trapping gas spewed by the burning of fossil fuels — climate change isn't so bad, and will result in a greener Earth.

At least in the California ecosystem, the plants that received extra carbon dioxide, as well as those that got extra warmth, didn't grow more or get greener. They also didn't remove the pollution and store more of it in the soil, said study author Chris Field, director of the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment. Plant growth tended to decline with rising temperatures. "This experiment really puts to bed the idea of a greener hypothesis where ecosystems save us from the implications of human-induced climate change," Field said.

Earlier this year, a team of international scientists released a study that looked at Earth from 1982 to 2009 and found it was greening, with a quarter to half the planet producing an increase in the growing season. Field said that earlier study is about trends the planet has already seen, but doesn't say much about the future. "We were able to use the experimental treatments to produce a 'time machine' allowing us to look at conditions we might encounter in the second half of the 21st century," Field said.

On ground outside Stanford's campus, scientists tended 132 different plots of flowers and grass, each with thousands of plants on them. Some of them got 275 extra parts per million of carbon dioxide in addition to what's already in the air, which was about 370 parts per million when the experiment started and is now more than 400. Others got an additional 3.6 degrees of heat (2 degrees Celsius), or more water, or more nitrogen.

EDIT

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/sep/06/future-climate-change-field-test-doesnt-make-earth/

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
17-Year Study Providing High CO2 Levels, Heat To Mixed Plant Communities Ends; Does Not End Well (Original Post) hatrack Sep 2016 OP
Pushback. yallerdawg Sep 2016 #1
Will mass media stop yawning long enough for real information to reach the public blm Sep 2016 #2
Did they test a longer growing season? bucolic_frolic Sep 2016 #3

yallerdawg

(16,104 posts)
1. Pushback.
Wed Sep 7, 2016, 10:20 AM
Sep 2016
The results, simulating a post-2050 world, aren't pretty. And they contradict those who insist that because plants like carbon dioxide — the main heat-trapping gas spewed by the burning of fossil fuels — climate change isn't so bad, and will result in a greener Earth.

At least in the California ecosystem, the plants that received extra carbon dioxide, as well as those that got extra warmth, didn't grow more or get greener. They also didn't remove the pollution and store more of it in the soil, said study author Chris Field, director of the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment. Plant growth tended to decline with rising temperatures.

It's not that plants will do more - it's that we need more plants!

That's where we'll find the equilibrium.

bucolic_frolic

(43,176 posts)
3. Did they test a longer growing season?
Wed Sep 7, 2016, 10:55 AM
Sep 2016

Because late March has been added as a month to plant here in PA,
as has late Sept, early October. And the trees shoot their buds earlier,
And I swear this is resulting in more foliage because I just can't keep up
with it.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»17-Year Study Providing H...