SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics of Energy

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Hawkmoon who wrote (33049)7/6/2012 6:39:05 AM
From: Maurice Winn3 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) of 86352
 
Hawk, there'd be no effect on O2 levels in air by doubling CO2 levels and thereby doubling photosynthesis [which wouldn't happen because incident light, water, mineral, and DNA design limit photosynthesis rates, not just CO2].

Oxygen is 21% of air while CO2 is 0.04%. As CO2 levels rise, oxygen output does increase but it's by a tiny amount. 500 times as much oxygen as carbon dioxide. For all the talk about CO2, the average person might think there is a LOT of the stuff in air.

There must be a heck of a lot of oxygen in the oceans too, considering that umpty megatons of fish are out there consuming it by the gigaton.

Oxygen is in big surplus. The limit on oxygen consumption is food supply for things that breathe oxygen and the limit on food supply for said animals is how fast plants grow, and the main limit on how fast plants grow is CO2 supply. Water and minerals are limits too, but CO2 is the big issue. The balance between plants and animals is way out of kilter.

Plants are entitled to at least 1000 parts per million. Just because they are unable to speak for themselves doesn't mean they don't have needs. If there was a fair vote on Earth, with each living thing having a vote, the vote would be for MORE CO2, not less. Almost none of the living things on Earth wants less CO2.

Democracy should be extended to include plants. One would think that People for the Ethical Treatment of Plants would recognize how plants have been deprived since the Carboniferous period. Plants suffered the biggest tragedy of the commons in biological history, with them all fighting for the last remnants of CO2 with no governmental authority to share the resources out fairly and in a sustainable way. It was every "man" for himself.

The rights of plants need recognition. CO2 levels should be increased to at least 1000 parts per million so that most plants can breathe easy and they can negotiate from a position that is not under such duress as they are now under. While thinking of aboriginal rights, we should remember that human aboriginals in Australia and USA for example are very recent Johny Come Lately newbies. Fussing over such "natives" while ignoring genuine natives is unfair. Plants were on those lands eons before people showed up and spoiled things. Other animals were there for millions of years before people showed up and began mass murder.

With modern human ethics, we are at last putting some CO2 back where it belongs, so plants can enjoy life more fully. That will also benefit people because we and our livestock depend on flourishing plants. The whole natural world depends on more CO2 too and therefore more plants.

Noblesse oblige,
Mqurice
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext