Maurice, I was referring to his specific example of drought..
We can assume that available CO2 is fairly equally divided across the planet, both terrestrial and oceanic. Now obviously the amount of CO2 that can be dissolved in sea water, and thereby available to phytoplankton, is a different factor..
So the assumption is that with CO2 levels rising, it's not a critical limiting factor in terrestrial plant growth.
Plants are not so fussy about their nutrient requires as humans, so they can get by with a boost in iron and not much else. Certainly in many areas they just need some iron.
I would agree.. Plants seem to be able to grow almost anywhere (depending on the species), given sufficient water, sunlight, and nutrients.
Iron has proven to be a limiting factor for terrestrial plant growth (which is why most fertilizers contain some), just as it is for oceanic flora. I applied a nice dose of it to my mother's yellowed lawn and the results were amazing.. Deep, dark green grass and much healthier..
WR and LS just want to ignore how critical phytoplanktonic populations are in the CO2 sequestration equation.
It matters not to them that the marine food chain is dying, along with various marine species that are so dependent upon them (and by consequence, denying humanity the bountiful harvest of those fisheries)..
Cap and trade, carbon credits, and all other attempts to control human productivity by imposing economically costly controls and solutions is what this AGW game is all really about.
I eventually can see this carbon tax developing into a "breathing tax".. Where we have to pay for the right to even breath out CO2, while denying humanity the opportunity to augment the biological processes that normally maintain a certain balance of CO2 in the atmosphere..
And this is a pollutant?
Hawk |
