Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,761
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    9
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    9
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    26771

    Default Greenhouse gasses - good for the planet

    Right from the stories that'll drive Al Gore and liberals nuts:


    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

    The dangerous rise in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere may be troubling scientists and world leaders but it could prove to be a boon for plants, German researchers said Tuesday.
    Increasing exposure to carbon dioxide appears to boost crop yields, Hans-Joachim Weigel of the Johann Heinrich von Thuenen Institute for rural areas, forestry and fisheries in the central city of Brunswick told AFP.

    "Output increased by about 10 percent for barley, beets and wheat" when the plants were subjected to higher levels of carbon dioxide, Weigel said.

    The Thuenen Institute, which has been monitoring the phenomenon in fields since 1999, trains CO2 jets on the plants so the gas reaches 550 parts per million in the air around them -- the level expected in the atmosphere by 2050.

    Weigel said the studies have indicated that while greater CO2 exposure appears to spur growth, it can also undermine the quality of the produce.

    He said the next step in the study would be to evaluate the effect of higher temperatures on plant growth -- which scientists cite as another consequence of higher CO2 emissions in the atmosphere.

    Weigel said that while the institute's findings may prove surprising to some, they are not intended to undermine the drive to slash CO2 emissions.

    "This research is not intended as an argument for doing nothing to curb the rise of CO2 levels," he said. "It is to find out what the effects would be."

    Other studies have presented a more mixed picture about the impact of higher CO2 levels on plants, and there is uncertainty about its effects on soil fertility and which plants benefit most from more CO2.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California
    Posts
    9,768
    Thanks (Given)
    1
    Thanks (Received)
    28
    Likes (Given)
    2
    Likes (Received)
    16
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    515526

    Default

    excellent thread, liberalism is a religion, and democrats are the disciples

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    5
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default I want to say...

    I'm a spamming retard!!! Duh!!!!!!!!!!!1
    Last edited by 5stringJeff; 07-10-2008 at 07:06 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,597
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1963

    Default

    Weigel said that while the institute's findings may prove surprising to some, they are not intended to undermine the drive to slash CO2 emissions.

    "This research is not intended as an argument for doing nothing to curb the rise of CO2 levels," he said. "It is to find out what the effects would be."
    So, CO2 is still bad for us....no good news there.
    "Unbloodybreakable" DCI Gene Hunt, 2008

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums