CO2 forest debate continues

Talbot Brooks tbrooks at uswcl.ars.ag.gov
Tue Dec 22 13:22:29 EST 1998


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_000E_01BE2D9C.48166D50
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    It has been reported by some NASA scientists that photosynthesis has =
been increasing by 1% for the past 10 years or so (part of their Mission =
To Planet Earth Project, if I correctly recall).  As far as severe =
weather doing more damage there is no evidence.  Perhaps more =
information about weather disturbances as technology and communication =
has improved, but none firmly showing increased storm/climate damage AS =
A RESULT OR COROLLARY (El Nino/La Nina or otherwise) to increasing =
atmospheric CO2 (IPCC 1996, National Climate Prediction Center web site =
etc...).  In the case of pollutants, increased atmospheric CO2 may =
actually serve to protect our forests and other flora.  It is well =
documented that CO2 enhances water use efficiency through comparitive =
reductions in stomatal conductance (apeture if you prefer)(Wall et al =
1997, Kimball et al 1995......).  As a consequence, influx of pollutants =
into plant tissue is reduced (Badiani et al, 1997 - keyword - =
antioxidents).  Furthermore, as CO2 increases growth, if additional =
damage were to occur, it would be possible for more biomass (ie =
sequestered carbon) to replace it in a shorter period of time.  Please =
don't get me wrong here folks - I'm not advocating everybody to stop =
carpooling, burn the forests and abandon alternative "clean" energy.  =
Lastly, as far as Bucky domes go, I would check with Biosphere II =
(http://www.bio2.edu)(re: kmorrisd at aol.com). =20


Talbot J. Brooks


------=_NextPart_000_000E_01BE2D9C.48166D50
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#83a39b>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; It has been =
reported by some=20
NASA scientists that photosynthesis has been increasing by 1% for the =
past 10=20
years or so (part of their Mission To Planet Earth Project, if I =
correctly=20
recall).&nbsp; As far as severe weather doing more damage there is no=20
evidence.&nbsp; Perhaps more information about weather disturbances as=20
technology and communication has improved, but none firmly showing =
increased=20
storm/climate damage AS A RESULT OR COROLLARY (El Nino/La Nina or =
otherwise) to=20
increasing atmospheric CO2 (IPCC 1996, National Climate Prediction =
Center web=20
site etc...).&nbsp; In the case of pollutants, increased atmospheric CO2 =
may=20
actually serve to protect our forests and other flora.&nbsp; It is well=20
documented that CO2 enhances water use efficiency through comparitive =
reductions=20
in stomatal conductance (apeture if you prefer)(Wall et al 1997, Kimball =
et al=20
1995......).&nbsp; As a consequence, influx of pollutants into plant =
tissue is=20
reduced (Badiani et al, 1997 - keyword - antioxidents).&nbsp; =
Furthermore, as=20
CO2 increases growth, if additional damage were to occur, it would be =
possible=20
for more biomass (ie sequestered carbon) to replace it in a shorter =
period of=20
time.&nbsp; Please don't get me wrong here folks - I'm not advocating =
everybody=20
to stop carpooling, burn the forests and abandon alternative =
&quot;clean&quot;=20
energy.&nbsp; Lastly, as far as Bucky domes go, I would check with =
Biosphere II=20
(http://www.bio2.edu)(re: <A=20
href=3D"mailto:kmorrisd at aol.com">kmorrisd at aol.com</A>).&nbsp; =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Talbot J. =
Brooks<BR></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_000E_01BE2D9C.48166D50--




More information about the Ag-forst mailing list