Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Study: Global plant growth surging alongside carbon dioxide (2017)

noaa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 143 posts

Re: Study: Global plant growth surging alongside carbon dioxide (2017)

#31

Post by roter »

bryan0 wrote: post #11

How do climate change models currently account for increase in plants? Are these plant growth numbers in line with expectations? Is this a large change or a rounding error in those models?

Any global climate model worth its salt will have a comprehensive carbon cycle submodel, tracking the sources and sinks of carbon in all its forms, between ocean, soil, land, and atmosphere. Some models evolve the amount and type of plants e.g. C1 to project future biome distribution [0]

One such model is aptly named TRIFFID [1]

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle

[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/35041539

Edit: non-paywall link to TRIFFID paper [3]

[3] http://terra.seos.uvic.ca/model/common/HCTN_24.pdf

Re: Study: Global plant growth surging alongside carbon dioxide (2017)

#32

Post by seattle_spring »

Nbox9 wrote: post #18

We’ve known about this effect for awhile. Tree growth has increased on volume but decreased in density since the industrial revolution[0]. A small bump in plant growth can not be seen as anything but the smallest of a silver lining. [0] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037811271...

> A small bump in plant growth can not be seen as anything but the smallest of a silver lining.

It could also be seen as a bad thing. Forest fire season in the PNW is a lot worse in years with a wetter spring followed by a dry summer. This is because the extra moisture encourages thicker brush growth, which then dries up and serves as tinder and fuel for the fires later in the season.

I would think extra plant growth in dry areas combined with any sort of warming trend, would end up acting similarly.

Re: Study: Global plant growth surging alongside carbon dioxide (2017)

#33

Post by prewett »

voisin wrote: post #13
johnnyApplePRNG wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another one is smoke from forest fires; actively cooling the planet.

Have you come across any quantification of this?

This is anecdotal quantification, but I lived in northern California for a few years and late June would usually be in the 100s or 110s. By August when California catches on fire, it cools down to 90s (when the smoke was blowing our way).

By contrast, when I lived in Texas (no fires), June and July would be in the low 100s, and the first two weeks of August would be 107 - 112.

Re: Study: Global plant growth surging alongside carbon dioxide (2017)

#34

Post by phkahler »

roter wrote: post #31
bryan0 wrote: post #11

How do climate change models currently account for increase in plants? Are these plant growth numbers in line with expectations? Is this a large change or a rounding error in those models?

Any global climate model worth its salt will have a comprehensive carbon cycle submodel, tracking the sources and sinks of carbon in all its forms, between ocean, soil, land, and atmosphere. Some models evolve the amount and type of plants e.g. C1 to project future biome distribution [0] One such model is aptly named TRIFFID [1] [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/3504…

One would hope they also have a comprehensive water vapor model including con-trails but last I checked it was still a research area.

Re: Study: Global plant growth surging alongside carbon dioxide (2017)

#35

Post by counters »

phkahler wrote: post #34
roter wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any global climate model worth its salt will have a comprehensive carbon cycle submodel, tracking the sources and sinks of carbon in all its forms, between ocean, soil, land, and atmosphere. Some models evolve the amount and type of plants e.g. C1 to project future biome distribution [0] One such model is aptly named TRIFFID [1] [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/3504…

One would hope they also have a comprehensive water vapor model including con-trails but last I checked it was still a research area.

Water vapor is, indeed, comprehensively included in climate models since the 1970s.

Re: Study: Global plant growth surging alongside carbon dioxide (2017)

#36

Post by sha256kira »

Inhibit wrote: post #22
jmclnx wrote: post #6

I have been noticing were I live, it has been getting greener and greener for many years 30+. First time I saw conformation on this.

Certainly the same here for the past 20 years. Although not the same year to year the plants do seem to be growing more vigorously overall. So we now have a sample size of two :).

The last time I went to Wisconsin and New York it seemed way greener than ~8 years ago. So make that sample size three (or maybe even four?)!

Re: Study: Global plant growth surging alongside carbon dioxide (2017)

#37

Post by colechristensen »

Nbox9 wrote: post #18

We’ve known about this effect for awhile. Tree growth has increased on volume but decreased in density since the industrial revolution[0]. A small bump in plant growth can not be seen as anything but the smallest of a silver lining. [0] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037811271...

A 30% bump in plant carbon sinking isn't a small bump, it's a major negative feedback control on atmospheric carbon.

Some people seem to have the attitude that if you aren't saying something negative about an environmental topic, you shouldn't be saying anything.

Re: Study: Global plant growth surging alongside carbon dioxide (2017)

#38

Post by bpodgursky »

nealabq wrote: post #15

I assume plant life is constrained by different things in different locations: - lack of water - too hot - too cold - not enough light (ground level of the rain forest?) - lack of soil nutrients (rain forest?) - too much salt I'll add CO2 levels to my mental list, a constraint that's independent of location.

It's little more subtle, but yes overall true. Higher CO2 makes it easier for plants to photosynthesize using less water, so they can grow in previously-too-dry locations.

Re: Study: Global plant growth surging alongside carbon dioxide (2017)

#39

Post by Lammy »

DJBunnies wrote: post #3

Did anybody else expect this? Plants love CO2, seems like excess will lead to crazy plant growth and a rebalance.

If science-fiction counts then Jeffrey Jones expected it in 1972's "Wholly Holy": https://i.imgur.com/DmbQANH.jpg (mildly NSFW art)

His 33-page "Ravens & Rainbows" collection has this and several other great short sci-fi stories in that old "Heavy Metal" comic style that's rarely seen these days, but same NSFW disclaimer applies: https://imgur.com/a/M0JUTSx

Re: Study: Global plant growth surging alongside carbon dioxide (2017)

#40

Post by burnte »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #25
nealabq wrote: post #15

I assume plant life is constrained by different things in different locations: - lack of water - too hot - too cold - not enough light (ground level of the rain forest?) - lack of soil nutrients (rain forest?) - too much salt I'll add CO2 levels to my mental list, a constraint that's independent of location.

> I assume plant life is constrained by different things in different locations: > - lack of water > - too hot > - too cold Hmm. There are lots of examples where plants do not grow in an area that (1) has a lot of water; and (2) is very cold. Are there any examples of a place that is too hot, as opposed to too dry? Even the cold examples might be driven more by a lack of liquid water than by temperature requirements.

Too hot and plants can't properly regulate water loss, shrivel, and die. Too cold, even well above freezing, and they can have problems moving their liquids due to increased viscosity. In both extremes you can have temps too far from optimal that inhibit enzyme reactions, killing the plants.
Post reply on HN