C02 is Improving Our Food Yield. More C02 Is Needed for Our World Population . Ever Hear of Photosynthesis ?

“Put another way, yields may have increased 1–2 [percent] per year due to CO2 fertilization in recent years,” the authors wrote, noting the positive correlation between increased atmospheric carbon dioxide and greater agricultural yields in recent decades.

Global Warming and Increase C02 BAD  ?  Bring it On! For Improved Crop Yields, "Global Warming and more C02 is going to potentially be beneficial if the  basic science of photosynthesis is applied of course, not politics..

NASA Satellite Data Support ‘Shockingly Large’ Carbon Dioxide Fertilization Effect: Study

By Nathan Worcester
 
October 13, 2021 Updated: October 14, 2021

NASA satellite data has shown that anywhere from 10 to 40 percent of improvements in key U.S. crop yields since 1940 could potentially be attributed to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide due to human activity, according to a new paper from Columbia University’s Charles A. Taylor and Wolfram Schlenker.

The authors noted that their findings are “on the very high end of the range found in the literature.”

“Taylor and Schlenker’s numbers are 10–100 times as large as previous estimates,” Richard S.J. Tol, a professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Sussex, told The Epoch Times via email.

Taylor and Schlenker arrived at their estimates using three separate modeling strategies. In addition, they ran sensitivity checks to rule out potential confounds, including economic activity, other pollutants, and their assumptions about the precise relationship between carbon dioxide levels and crop yields.

Their models were based on data from 2015 through 2020 collected by NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2) satellite, which they replicated with NOAA’s CarbonTracker system. They also used county-level data on corn, soybeans, and winter wheat yields from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Agricultural Statistics Service.

Taylor and Schlenker found that an increase of 1 part per million of carbon dioxide raised corn yields by 0.5 percent, soybean yields by 0.6 percent, and wheat yields by 0.8 percent.

“Put another way, yields may have increased 1–2 [percent] per year due to CO2 fertilization in recent years,” the authors wrote, noting the positive correlation between increased atmospheric carbon dioxide and greater agricultural yields in recent decades.

They also noted that the potentially dramatic fertilizing effect of atmospheric carbon dioxide might not be so unexpected, given how it’s used in actual agricultural greenhouses.

“The gas has long been pumped into greenhouses to spur photosynthesis and increase the yield of horticultural crops. Optimal CO2 concentrations of 900 [parts per million] have been suggested, which is over twice current ambient levels,” the authors wrote.

Taylor and Schlenker’s approach contrasts with field- and laboratory-based studies on carbon dioxide enrichment. The authors argued that such experiments “are limited in the extent to which they reflect real-world growing conditions in commercial farms at a large geographic scale.”

Some research on carbon dioxide and plant growth has suggested that increased carbon dioxide may affect plant nutritional quality in both positive and negative ways.

A 2019 meta-analysis of 57 articles on carbon dioxide and vegetable growth concluded that elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide raised fructose, glucose, total soluble sugar, total antioxidant capacity, total phenols, total flavonoids, ascorbic acid, and calcium in plants while lowering protein, nitrate, magnesium, iron, and zinc.

The research has sparked a range of reactions on Twitter.

“A short time series though—geospatial variation in CO2 probably not well measured prior to this satellite data a“If you’re an [agriculture] person, you’ll want to look at this study. They find shockingly large CO2 fertilization effects,” wrote Michael Roberts, an economist at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.nd time series confounded by technical change,” he continued, later adding that “someone ought to compare the satellite data to the ground-based measures.”

In an email exchange with The Epoch Times, Roberts confirmed that he doesn’t believe their confounding due to technical change is likely to be an issue in Taylor and Schlenker’s study, adding that any measurement error “could go either way,” and that the satellite data used by Taylor and Schlenker are likely superior to ground-based measurements with respect to accuracy.

“Translation: although farmable regions may shift if there’s a slight warming effect, higher CO2 emissions may result in HIGHER crop yields,” wrote Mark B. Spiegel, managing member of Stanphyl Capital.

Nathan Worcester 
Nathan Worcester
Nathan Worcester is an environmental reporter at The Epoch Times.

Views: 70

Comment

You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!

Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine

Comment by Willem Post on October 25, 2021 at 5:42pm
My two comments on Watt is up with That
 
 

1)

This is wonderful.

CCC, a bunch of RE idiots trying to pull the wool over the eyes of innocent, gullible lay people, got caught lying and obfuscating big-time.

CCC, which advises UK PM Johnson, aka, the UNRULY MOP, used 7 days of low wind in 2050, whereas the low-wind days were 65 in 2021, and 78 in 2016.
CCC wanted to make wind look extra, extra good.

More low-wind days means vastly greater CAPACITY, MW, of instantly available, reliable, low-cost, traditional power plants, which must be staffed, fueled, ready to operate, in good working order, as demanded by the UK grid operator, to fill in any wind (and solar) shortfalls; the UK has LOTS OF DAYS without sun, throughout the year.

Initially, CCC was obstructing the public release of its report to THE UNRULY MOP
CCC was ordered by the Court to release the report to the public.

Are you f….g kidding me?
We are talking hundreds of millions of small folks spending $TRILLIONS EACH YEAR, to “save the world”, and CCC is blatantly lying about the feasibility and cost!
These CCC people should be drawn and quartered.

ALL OF THIS IS AWFUL NEWS FOR THE SCOTLAND CLIMATE MEETING

BTW, every wind turbine draws significant electricity from the grid, whether it is producing or not.
 
 
 
2)
Great graph.

It clearly shows, the capacity’s factor of wind very often is less than 10%
The average CF is about 30%.

It is important to note wind power is the cube of wind speed 

In addition, at very low CFs, say 3 to 4%, with winds at 4 mph and less, the wind turbine is producing about as much as it is consuming, i.e., no net feed to the grid. Yikes

The graph shows a lot of red at low CFs, meaning onshore winds are frequently very weak.

The RE clowns at CCC are of-the-charts fabricators of lies.

They should be drawn and quartered

Comment by Thinklike A. Mountain on October 22, 2021 at 2:31pm
Comment by Willem Post on October 20, 2021 at 4:32pm

Climate idiots very rarely mention the positive impacts of CO2 on crops grown for humans and animals, and on forests and other wild biomass.

However, if some type of minuscule animal or plant becomes less prevalent, all hell breaks lose regarding the end of the world in 10 years; act now!!

Comment by Penny Gray on October 20, 2021 at 2:35pm

Jurassic Park, here we come!

Comment by Kenneth Capron on October 20, 2021 at 12:30pm

CO2 increases crop production which then produces more Oxygen. Could increased O2 then lead to increased growth in animal size? (aka Megafauna).

 

Maine as Third World Country:

CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power

 

Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.

Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT

******** IF LINKS BELOW DON'T WORK, GOOGLE THEM*********

(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/From Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-swept-task-force-set-the-rules/From Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.” https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/flaws-in-bill-like-skating-with-dull-skates/

Not yet a member?

Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?

We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

 -- Mahatma Gandhi

"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi 

Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!

Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law

Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future

"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."

https://pinetreewatch.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/

© 2022   Created by Webmaster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service