Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumEnergy Trade Group - We Must Double Atmospheric CO2, Because It Means More Plants And Money
WARNING: YOU ARE ABOUT TO READ THE STUPIDEST THING THAT ANYONE HAS EVER SAID IN THE HISTORY OF THE SPECIES.EDIT
CO2 is basically plant food, and the more CO2 in the environment the better plants do, proclaimed Roger Bezdek, a consultant to energy companies, at an event hosted Monday by the United States Energy Association, an industry trade group.
The session, at the Ronald Reagan Building (Ed. - of course) in downtown Washington, was devoted to demonstrating that CO2 benefits clearly outweigh any hypothesized costs. And though Bezdek is an economist, not a scientist, he played one on Monday showing a PowerPoint presentation that documented a tree growing faster when exposed to more carbon dioxide. CO2 increases over the past several decades have increased global greening by about 11 percent, the consultant said. Higher carbon levels in the atmosphere will boost worldwide agricultural productivity by $10 trillion over the next 35 years, he added.
And this doesnt include the indirect benefits of good-ol CO2. Over the past two centuries, global life expectancy has more than doubled, population has increased eightfold, incomes have increased 11-fold. At the same time, CO2 concentrations increased from 320 ppm to about 400 ppm, Bezdek said, using the abbreviation for parts per million. The benefits of CO2, he said, exceed its costs by ratios of between 100-1 and 900-1. A chart helpfully illustrated this Close Link Between CO2 & GDP.
EDIT
Clearly, more CO2 would make us all breathe easier. Controlled studies indicated that twice todays levels would be very good for agriculture, he said, and below certain levels .?.?. plants wouldnt grow and we wouldnt live.
EDIT
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-the-new-climate-denialism-carbon-dioxide-is-good-for-you/2014/12/15/beaafc72-8499-11e4-b9b7-b8632ae73d25_story.html
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 630 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Energy Trade Group - We Must Double Atmospheric CO2, Because It Means More Plants And Money (Original Post)
hatrack
Dec 2014
OP
pipoman
(16,038 posts)1. "energy trade groups" taking their dying breathsg
We're entering the energy age, an age where energy first becomes cheap, then becomes a non-issue. .
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,727 posts)2. How to Lie With Statistics
Not you; Bezdek. I just read this in the WaPo, and I wanted to see if someone had already posted it. The casual "the same time that this has happened, that has happened too" remark should set off warning flares that can be seen from outer space.
We also need more piracy:
Correlation does not imply causation
How to Lie With Statistics
Roger Bezdek
IDemo
(16,926 posts)3. Correlcausation
No point in trying to separate the two concepts.