David Motes is a 43-year professional chemical engineer residing in Houston, TX. His 23 page engineering paper is a guest post titled: “Global Warming Driven by Plant Evapotranspiration Reduction, Not CO2 GHG! Solution- More Plants”. The paper is summarized as follows: Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is quantitatively driven by CO2 induced Plant Evapotranspiration Reduction (PER), not CO2 GreenHouse Gas (GHG) effects. David uses consensus science facts and diagrams from CO2 GHG proponent sites such as the IPCC, NASA, NOAA, and the International Energy Agency to quantitatively prove the scientific fact that PER is a significant driver in AGW. Conversely, CO2 GHG theory remains a largely unquantifiable, problematic theory. When someone shares that they are feeling sad or best buy for viagra mad, have them draw from the jar which is packed with encouraging, inspiring comments. Modulift – This Company is popularly known tadalafil levitra for its effective results in increasing the ejaculation time of 2-6 minutes and the internationally recognized average time is 10 minutes. Create an environment- viagra discount For a long-lasting intimacy; you will need to set an environment to hit your five senses. Some people go to extremes viagra cheap sale with fasting, laxatives, enemas, colonics, diuretics, and even exercise and begin to lose essential nutrients from food alone, particularly for the on-the-go-man. By example, 10 CO2 GHG theory problems are quantified and graphically presented. His focus was on engineering quantification versus hereto date presentation of GHG data and theories. Increasing plant life is less expensive and substantially more effective than just reducing annual fossil fuel CO2 emissions (contributes only 1% of existing atmospheric CO2). His paper, engineering quantification, and science is well worth reading and further research. Click to download.
So in a nutshell is Mr Motes saying that; higher CO2 is
increasing the efficiency of stomata leading to plants needing less water
uptake? So is the argument that this leaves more water/humidity in the
atmosphere to contribute to the greenhouse effect? There is a lot of
satellite based research saying the planet is greening.
Beachgirl, yes, higher CO2 causes less plant water evaporation which directly warms the atmosphere. The amount of water vapor in air changes little and GHG effect is quantitatively insignificant in comparison to reduce evaporation effect. The key is water cycle interchange which cools the earth, not water vapor concentration, per page 14, search Sequestation.
Yes, almost all satellite data says the planet is greening, due to the higher CO2, particularly in deserts and arid lands. However, global biomass is decreasing by replacing forests with grasses as detailed on page 15, search Caution. I hope I answered your questions. Thanks for the interest. David.
Interesting. So any increase in solar activity would cause more evaporation, thus reducing the effect by helping plants. And less solar activity would reduce evaporation and reduce any cooling but bring less rainfall.
However the planet cannot be ‘greening’ because Sir David Attenborough tells us in the latest BBC propaganda piece that the Sahara has expanded 14% due to global warming. Lots of gullible school kids will believe this because Uncle Daffy told them so.
Graeme, I agree with both your points about solar effects being mitigated by evaporation, part of natural balances. I do not know if the Sahara increased or not. However, global biomass has definitely decreased due to deforestation and land use changes. Thanks for your interest. David.
This is a copy from a Jan 2020 pdf press release of Prof. Ranga Myneni of Boston University. A global expert in the field of satellite measuring of global greening. A must read for those interested.
PUBLIC RELEASE: 13-Jan-2020
Contact: Chi Chen & Ranga Myneni
chenchi@bu.edu
ranga.myneni@gmail.com
Boston University
In the fight against climate change, plants are the lonely-only defenders
Satellite data and models show global warming could be 20-25% higher were it not for the carbon trapping and
cooling effect of a greening Earth during the past 40 years. Stopping deforestation and ecologically sensible largescale
tree planting could be one simple, but not sufficient, defense against climate change.
Boston University
Boston—A new study reports continued climate altering carbon emissions and intensive land use have
inadvertently greened half of the Earth’s vegetated lands. Green leaves convert sunlight to sugars, thus
providing food, fiber and fuel, while replacing carbon dioxide in the air with water vapor. The removal
of heat-trapping CO2 and evapo-transpiration of H2O cools the Earth’s surface. Global greening since
the early 1980s may have thus reduced global warming, possibly by as much as 0.2 to 0.25oC, reports
the study “Characteristics, drivers and feedbacks of global greening” published in the inaugural issue of the
journal Nature Reviews Earth and Environment.
This comprehensive study, based on a review of over 250 published articles and new results from
multiple satellites, model studies and field observations, details the geography, causes and
consequences of global greening. “This phenomenal greening, together with global warming, sea-level
rise and sea-ice decline, represents highly credible evidence of anthropogenic climate change” write
the lead authors Shilong Piao and Xuhui Wang of the Sino-French Institute for Earth System Science
in the College of Urban and Environmental Sciences at Peking University, PRC.
Near-daily observations since the early 1980s from NASA and NOAA satellites reveal vast expanses
of the Earth’s vegetated lands from the Arctic to the temperate latitudes exhibiting vigorous greening
tendencies, as previously reported by Prof. Ranga Myneni and his PhD students, Taejin Park and Chi
Chen, of Boston University, USA. Notably, the NASA MODIS sensors observed pronounced
greening during the 21st century in the most populous and developing countries, China and India.
Even regions far, far removed from human reach have not escaped global warming and greening
trends. “Svalbard in the high-arctic, for example, has seen a 30% increase in greenness concurrent with
an increase in mean summer temperature from 2.9 to 4.7oC between 1986 and 2015” said co-author
Dr. Rama Nemani of NASA’s Ames Research Center, USA.
The reasons for global greening vary – intensive use of land for farming, large-scale planting of trees,
a warmer and wetter northly clime, re-wilding of abandoned lands, recovery from past disturbances –
but seems chiefly due to CO2 fertilization. “It is ironic that the very same carbon emissions responsible
for harmful changes to climate are also fertilizing plant growth, which in turn is somewhat moderating
global warming” said co-author Dr. Jarle Bjerke of the Norwegian Institute for Nature Research,
Norway.
Carbon emissions from fossil fuel use and tropical deforestation added 160 ppm of CO2 to the
atmosphere during the past 40 years. About 40 ppm of which diffused passively into the oceans and
another 50 ppm was actively taken up by plants. The 70 ppm remaining in the atmosphere, together
with other greenhouse gases, is responsible for the observed 1oC warming over land since the early
1980s. “Plants are actively defending against the dangers of carbon pollution by not only sequestering
carbon on land but also by wetting the atmosphere through transpiration of ground water and
evaporation of precipitation intercepted by their bodies” said co-author Dr. Philippe Ciais, associate
director of the Laboratory of Climate and Environmental Sciences, Gif-sur-Yvette, France. He added
“stopping deforestation and sustainable, ecologically sensible afforestation could be one of the
simplest and cost-effective, though not sufficient, defenses against climate change.”
It is not easy to accurately estimate the cooling benefit from global greening because of the complex
inter-connected nature of the climate system. Cooling from carbon sequestration and increased evapotranspiration
could amount to 0.2 to 0.25oC during this 40-year period. “This un-intended benefit of
global greening, and its potential transitory nature, suggests how much more daunting, and urgent, is
the stated goal of keeping global warming to below 1.5 to 2oC, especially given the trajectory of carbon
emissions and history of inaction during the past decades” said Dr. Hans Tømmervik of the
Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Norway.
About Boston University—Founded in 1839, Boston University is an internationally recognized
private research university with more than 35,000 students participating in undergraduate, graduate,
and professional programs. More information at www.bu.edu/
Read the paper at Nature Reviews Earth and Environment:
www.nature.com/articles/s43017-019-0001-x
For graphics and additional information:
sites.bu.edu/cliveg/
Contact information:
Chi Chen: chenchi@bu.edu, Tel. +1-608-886-8618
Ranga Myneni: ranga.myneni@gmail.com, Tel. +1-617-470-7065
Warwick, thanks for the article reference, extremely interesting. I agree with 100% of the Nature article by Chi Chen & Ranga Myneni, accessed separately at Nature journal. I only disagree with the politically-corrected press release from the Boston University press group. Stopping deforestation, largescale tree planting, and reversing land use change is definitely sufficient (contrary to the press release) to reverse global warming and climate change as quantified in my paper. Those actions are simple and sufficient, not just 25% sufficient. Interestingly, the University press added to Chen’s paper the insufficiency of reforestation and primacy of CO2 GHG theory which was not in Chen’s paper. I recognize that Boston University is a political institution, enough said. David.