The good of carbon dioxide outweighs the bad, according to a new study by Indur M. Goklany for the The Global Warming Policy Foundation
The good, unfortunately, is not often discussed in the many rants warning about how manmade CO2 will warm the Earth to disastrous levels.
The study concludes, according to Freeman Dyson, who wrote in the study's preface:
First, the non-climatic effects of carbon dioxide are dominant over the climatic effects and are overwhelmingly beneficial. Second, the climatic effects ob- served in the real world are much less damaging than the effects predicted by the climate models, and have also been frequently beneficial.
Here are the study's major findings:
- This paper addresses the question of whether, and how much, increased carbon dioxide concentrations have benefited the biosphere and humanity by stimulating plant growth, warming the planet and increasing rainfall.
- Empirical data confirms that the biosphere’s productivity has increased by about 14% since 1982, in large part as a result of rising carbon dioxide levels.
- Thousands of scientific experiments indicate that increasing carbon dioxide con- centrations in the air have contributed to increases in crop yields.
- These increases in yield are very likely to have reduced the appropriation of land for farming by 11–17% compared with what it would otherwise be, resulting in more land being left wild.
- Satellite evidence confirms that increasing carbon dioxide concentrations have also resulted in greater productivity of wild terrestrial ecosystems in all vegetation types.
- Increasing carbon dioxide concentrations have also increased the productivity of many marine ecosystems.
- In recent decades, trends in climate-sensitive indicators of human and environ- mental wellbeing have improved and continue to do so despite claims that they would deteriorate because of global warming.
- Compared with the benefits from carbon dioxide on crop and biosphere produc- tivity, the adverse impacts of carbon dioxide – on the frequency and intensity of extreme weather, on sea level, vector-borne disease prevalence and human health – have been too small to measure or have been swamped by other factors.
- Models used to influence policy on climate change have overestimated the rate of warming, underestimated direct benefits of carbon dioxide, overestimated the harms from climate change and underestimated human capacity to adapt so as to capture the benefits while reducing the harms.
- Itisverylikelythattheimpactofrisingcarbondioxideconcentrationsiscurrently net beneficial for both humanity and the biosphere generally. These benefits are real, whereas the costs of warming are uncertain. Halting the increase in carbon dioxide concentrations abruptly would deprive people and the planet of the ben- efits of carbon dioxide much sooner than they would reduce any costs of warming.
Be predictable. Be the first person to post a comment that the study has no credibility because of who the author is and who funded it. Don't bother discussing any of the substance. Be predictable. And never mind that global warming alarmists are funded by ideological, political and governmental sources that are caught up with their own biases.
Visit my new freelance writer website at http://www.dennisbyrne.net