Posted on 12/26/2014 12:11:20 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
The Doom message version 48.2a (subclause i) has been released.
Forget methane clathrate pits, now extra plant growth (blame CO2) could cause global soil to unleash massive amounts of carbon.
Carbon dioxide (aka “pollution”) feeds plants. This is bad (didn’t you know?). An all new “first” computer model with plants, soil, and fungus, warns us that more plants could get soil microbes excited which might break down more soil carbon and release it into the air. Disaster! It’s a could-be-might-be-catastrophe. (At least until paragraph 6 — see that caveat below).
In the meantime this is is so big, it’s practically nuclear — the model reports that it could set off a “chain reaction”:
An increase in human-made carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could initiate a chain reaction between plants and microorganisms that would unsettle one of the largest carbon reservoirs on the planet — soil.
Did you know there is twice as much CO2, carbon in the soil as there is in Earths whole atmosphere?
Researchers based at Princeton University report in the journal Nature Climate Change that the carbon in soil — which contains twice the amount of carbon in all plants and Earth’s atmosphere combined — could become increasingly volatile as people add more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, largely because of increased plant growth. The researchers developed the first computer model to show at a global scale the complex interaction between carbon, plants and soil, which includes numerous bacteria, fungi, minerals and carbon compounds that respond in complex ways to temperature, moisture and the carbon that plants contribute to soil.
(The “first”? David Evans tells me FullCAM — the Australian carbon accounting model he developed, did this on an Australian scale years ago, and they they weren’t the first then).
Note the politically correct permitted phrasing next:
Although a greenhouse gas and pollutant, carbon dioxide also supports plant growth.
So after 500 million years of evolution of carbon based life-forms, carbon dioxide is first and foremost a greenhouse gas, secondly it’s a pollutant, but but… it does… “support” plant growth. (Could we make that weaker? Plants need CO2 so desperately that they suck out all the stuff they can get before morning tea, then they slop growing – and the way to describe this is that CO2 “supports” them – like a tomato stake, right?)
As trees and other vegetation flourish in a carbon dioxide-rich future, their roots could stimulate microbial activity in soil that in turn accelerates the decomposition of soil carbon and its release into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide, the researchers found.
Note the researchers found a “could”.
The next two paragraphs tell us how useful this work is — not for predicting the natural world necessarily — but for countering that annoying idea that plants might be a net sink of carbon:
This effect counters current key projections regarding Earth’s future carbon cycle, particularly that greater plant growth could offset carbon dioxide emissions as flora take up more of the gas, said first author Benjamin Sulman, who conducted the modeling work as a postdoctoral researcher at the Princeton Environmental Institute.
“You should not count on getting more carbon storage in the soil just because tree growth is increasing,” said Sulman, who is now a postdoctoral researcher at Indiana University.
Then there’s the killer caveat (maybe most readers won’t get this far). This is a doozy:
On the other hand, microbial activity initiated by root growth could lock carbon onto mineral particles and protect it from decomposition, which would increase long-term storage of carbon in soils, the researchers report.
So more plants with more roots will definitely cause bacteria to release more CO2 except if they don’t.
But seriously, this is a really good model. It’s complex, it must be right:
Whether carbon emissions from soil rise or fall, the researchers’ model depicts an intricate soil-carbon system that contrasts starkly with existing models that portray soil as a simple carbon repository, Sulman said. An oversimplified perception of the soil carbon cycle has left scientists with a glaring uncertainty as to whether soil would help mitigate future carbon dioxide levels — or make them worse, Sulman said.
How lucky we are that the glaring uncertainty is resolved… I mean, might-be could-be settled.
The researchers’ soil-carbon cycle model has been integrated into the global land model used for climate simulations by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) located on Princeton’s Forrestal Campus.
Settled enough for NOAA – give us another grant.
Settled enough for Nature Climate Change.
Sulman, et al (2014) Microbe-driven turnover offsets mineral-mediated storage of soil carbon under elevated CO2. Nature Climate Change; 4 (12): 1099 DOI: 10.1038/nclimate2436
Mudfinger. He’s the man, the man with the muddy touch.
Holy crap, the Gaya turds are complete idiots. I already knew that though.
Why do carbon based life forms want to get rid of carbon ?
KILL ALL THE PLANTS!!!
Yeah, but she cleans up real nice
Thanks Ernest.
I think we will need to destroy earth in order to save it.
“Forget methane clathrate pits...”
Sure, no problem. Do I actually have to know what that is before I wipe it, or can I just do a preemptive core dump?
Self Loathing? Ignorance? Insanity? All of the above?
But . . . isn't that what we're buying when we buy "carbon credits"? I mean trees, that is?
So what, exactly are "carbon credits" for (besides stuffing more cash into Algore's offshore bank account)?
The simplest, most obvious solution is to burn all the plants before they release carbon.
Yeah! That would fix it!
Yes—”research” sponsored by those who won’t work with their own hands. So they despise others who do. I’ve seen it quite a few times on the local level (NIMBYs and their Republicrat friends in offices).
It’s not easy being green!
Maybe they should be granted their desire: more absolute desertification in their coastal and scenic areas of choice for residence. Maybe their drinking water sources will dry up.
One traditional use of the compost pile was inside the greenhouse. if a greenhouse is even somewhat sealed it will run out of CO2 inside. Ventilation loses heat, so nowadays there is CO2 producing equipment inside (e.g. propane driven heaters). But a properly tended compost pile would also do the trick.
We’re all gonna die! Eventually.
I’ve been pointing out for quite some time that a lot of commercial greenhouses have CO2 supplementation that takes concentration levels to 2.5X - 3X atmospheric levels. The Warmist Alarmists don’t like to talk about this.
The top of it is flat, so come Spring I could set my transplant trays right on top, with a light plastic cover (with a little ventilation) over all. How 'bout that!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.