We learned that trees can turn CO2 to O, so why can’t trees reduce the ammount of CO2 ( the biggest greenhouse gas) and solve the problem?
Edit: But if there is more CO2 the plants grow faster so they can aborsb more too.
In: Biology
Because CO2 is not necessarily the limiting factor on all plant growth. Most plants are limited by nitrogen, as only a few types can fix their own. Nitrogen is very abundant in the atmosphere but plants rely on nitrogen fixing bacteria to convert molecular nitrogen (N2) in the atmosphere to the usable form, ammonia (NH3).
In fact, without the Haber process that was developed in early 20th century (which converts N2 to NH3 on an industrial scale, primarily for use in fertilizers), we wouldn’t be able to produce enough food to prevent mass starvation.
Besides, the vast majority of CO2 fixation is done by photosynthetic algae. All in all it is just inadequate to compensate for the increased CO2 production caused by humans. It was already in balance before the industrial revolution, there is a finite limit to the amount of CO2 that can be absorbed by natural processes.
Picture a sink and faucet. The faucet is the production of CO2, the drain is CO2 absorption. Before industry came along, the sink remained about half full, with the faucet replacing the water draining out. But then humans started using fossil fuels, it’s a drop in the sink, but the sink was already in equilibrium, so each drop raises the level in the sink. And unlike gravity assisting the drain, the faucet gets turned up higher as the level in the sink rises since increased CO2 causes increased temperature, which warms the oceans, releasing more CO2. This is the runaway greenhouse effect, it’s what will quickly turn Earth into Venus if we don’t reverse it.
Latest Answers