Video scenes shots:
Watch the video:
| URL: | |
| Embed: |
Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment
Other videos by this author:
 |
Wind Energy at the Crossroad Posted by: greenman3610
Video duration: 753 seconds Related: N/A Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment |
Further Reading: Global Warming - Climate Change - Energy - Recycling - Pollution
Latest articles: Facts about solar energy ~ Pros and cons of solar energy ~ How does solar energy work ~ Solar energy advantages disadvantages ~ Types of energy ~ Advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy ~ Who are the world's 1 renewable energy site? ~ How does recycling affect the environment? ~ Why is recycling so important? ~ Interesting recycling facts ~ Natural causes of global warming ~ Is global warming real? ~ Safe and clean energy ~ Effects of water pollution ~ Types of water pollution ~ Land pollution ~ Poems about pollution ~ Definition of climate change ~ Fiji social capital community meetings climate change
Latest comments made on this video:
By: StAverti. on 21 May 12, 21:47:53
Good luck trying that on the entire worlds crop fields :) oh and without damaging the crops themselves.... Climate change causes problems, just? as much with plants and our food supply as with other earth systems.
By: oldschoolgreentube. on 21 May 12, 21:19:19
Nothing a little white vinegar won't take care of. Works way better than round up. Faster too. Usually knocks grass type weeds back in 3 or 4? days. I have used in it on ivy, kudzu, jade plants, some god awful thorny thing that was growing in my back yard and all kinds of other unidentified and unwanted plants/weeds etc. I plow the weed remains under or throw them in my composte pile and replant right away. Can't do that with round up. And its cheap.
By: StAverti. on 21 May 12, 06:44:54
Yep, and weed species are more able to thrive? under higher CO2 conditions, causing significant problems for farmers (aka global food supply) and gardeners :) climateandfarming(dot)org/pdfs/FactSheets/III(dot)1Weeds(dot)pdf
By: oldschoolgreentube. on 21 May 12, 06:16:44
Yep? they're plants too.
By: StAverti. on 21 May 12, 04:31:12
The weeds in your garden especially will love? it :)
By: oldschoolgreentube. on 21 May 12, 03:25:07
Neither of us is going to change the mind of the other. We will see what we will see. Both China and? India are ignoring the Kyoto accords. Airlines are refusing to pay the carbon taxes being leveled in the EU and humanity continues to produce CO2.None of the dire predictions of the past have come to pass and life continues to go on.I suspect it will for a very long time to come.Now I am going to go make a ton of CO2 and roast some marshmellows with my children.My garden will love it.
By: StAverti. on 21 May 12, 03:13:15
Additionally, with out green house gasses in our? atmosphere, the earth would have an average temperature below freezing.... The greenhouse effect in and of itself is not only not bad, it is NECESSARY for our survival on this planet... but none of the stops the reality that rapid changes to the climate system have and will lead to real and potentially dire consequences for our species, and all the others living on the Earth.
By: StAverti. on 21 May 12, 03:11:28
The reality, as I have said, is global warming will not have a net benefit for plants, especially not the few plants we all eat.. Hughes, in? TEE, Volume 15, Issue 2, 1 February 2000, Pages 56--61 Peng et al., in PNAS, July 6, 2004 vol. 101 no. 27 9971-9975 Memmott et al., in EL, Volume 10, Issue 8, pages 710--717, August 2007 "Global Warming and Agriculture: Impact Estimates by Country" By William R. Cline
By: StAverti. on 21 May 12, 03:05:10
Yea, I never said they didn;t need it. I Agreed with you that they did, just like People need it :) but that has NO relevance what so ever to global climate change, as the CO2 the plants use goes right back to the atmosphere when they die? in the winter. This produces a seasonal cycle, but nothing more. Now you can get a little bit of sequestration with old growth forests... but since we cut those down... the result is plants don't stop global warming very much at all.
By: StAverti. on 21 May 12, 02:59:49
And some hydroponic operations don't use added CO2, so what? like I said before the ENTIRE inclusion of hydroponics into this discourse is MOOT, because the vast majority of crops grown on the planet are NOT in hydroponic operations, they are virtually ALL grown through traditional means, outside, where soil and water characteristics can't be as easily controlled. So please stop pursuing that Red Herring, and if? you simply can't refute my scientific points say so and move on with your life :)
By: oldschoolgreentube. on 21 May 12, 02:55:53
Fact is you are wrong. Use whatever 2 dollar words you want to say? it isn't so but it won't change the fact that you are dead wrong. CO2 is absoulutely necessary and beneficial to plant growth. Without it plants would die. You could have all the nitrates, moisture, and whatever else is necessary but without CO2 you won't have living plants.
By: oldschoolgreentube. on 21 May 12, 02:52:42
Its is not sometimes done.It? is always done.My statements are not irrelevant they are right on topic.The USDA publishes tables on optimum light intensity, temperature and CO2 concentrations to achieve maximum yield depending on the type of crop. Most hydro ops use a pilot light CO2 generator some smaller operations use recycled flu gasses. Here is a link that discusses in detail the effects and results of different CO2 concentrations.(dot)ncbi(dot)nlm(dot)nih(dot)gov/pmc/articles/PMC396144/
By: StAverti. on 20 May 12, 21:16:13
It is not INTEGRAL in hydroponics. It is sometimes done? but is not inherently necessary. You produced an Ignoratio Elenchi, it has nothing to do with reality because the VAST majority of all agricultural production in the world is not from hydroponics :) and so such a practice has no place in a discussion on how plants CO2 use is virtually negligible in decadal to centennial scale climate change.
By: oldschoolgreentube. on 20 May 12, 21:11:19
Incorrect. Gassing of fields in hydroponics productions is an integral part of the process. All industrial hydroponics facilities utilize increased CO2 to increase yield. It would be almost impossible to do this in a traditional farm setting. Certainly not cost effective. CO2 hoods are part and parcel of the commercial? hydroponics industry .
By: StAverti. on 20 May 12, 20:44:45
Or that drought caused by the increased CO2? will more than likely negatively impact much of the plants that do have an advantage in a CO2 environment... potentially resulting in famine regardless.
By: StAverti. on 20 May 12, 20:42:21
SCRIPPS data: esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/?
By: StAverti. on 20 May 12, 20:41:52
Which is up from the ~.02% it was at before the industrial revolution. And has accounted for ~1 degree C of global average temperature increase. You can see the actual affect of plants on CO2 levels on the measurements from SCRIPPS measurements. The red line is direct measurements, the black is average measurements. Note the saw tooth like pattern? in direct measurements, the peaks are N hemisphere winter, and the troughs are N. Hemisphere summer. The most important fact: signal is only seasonal!
By: StAverti. on 20 May 12, 20:35:06
The main point however is that you are? arguing a moot point. CO2 can be used by plants and humans all we like (we use it to help regulate the acidity of bodily fluids), that doesn't stop the massive atmospheric increase in CO2 from human activity from causing a warming of global average temperatures, or all the negative consequences that come with it.
By: StAverti. on 20 May 12, 20:33:11
Incorrect, just as you NEED proteins (nitrogen), calcium (for bones), etc to build bodily materials, plants need similar nutrients to grow (nitrogen, potassium, calcium), etc. Those materials (nitrogen, phosphorous and calcium) are what farmers and gardeners fertilize their fields and gardens with (you don't see farmers gassing their fields with CO2), and those materials have a MUCH greater affect on healthy plant growth? than CO2 does.
By: oldschoolgreentube. on 20 May 12, 19:06:44
Yes you are correct in this statement. On average decaying plant? life releases about 220 gigatons (220,000,000,000) of CO2 annualy. Compared to 6.5 gt from man made sources. The respiration of trillions up trillions of micorbial life forms in the soil and CO2 releases from the oceans account for the rest of the CO2 in the atmosphere which stil only makes up .04% of the atmosphere in total.
By: oldschoolgreentube. on 20 May 12, 18:52:38
I think I am finally understanding your twisted logic. You are saying that even though CO2 is critical for plant growth it in and of itself is not a food stuff? It is only? one component in the production of sugars that the plant uses and that the sugars themselves are actually the food stuff. Is that correct? By that logic nitrogen, phosphates etc are not plant food either. For that matter the items we consume daily are not food just the building blocks of food.
By: WayneStobbe. on 20 May 12, 13:33:16
Seriously? This video debunks the concept of CO2 being plant food? Be funny if not for the frightening reality that? were we to somehow manage to reduce CO2 levels that it would result in global starvation.
By: StAverti. on 20 May 12, 06:58:33
The best part is, your entire line of reasoning is moot. What happens to all the carbon dioxide incorporated in a plant during the growing season? It goes right back to the atmosphere in the winter when? the plant dies and decays. So what's the net effect of plants on atmospheric CO2? with the exception of old growth tree stands, there is virtually no affect, CO2 is drawn down during growing season, and put right back when the plants decay. This results in seasonal variation of CO2, but no trend.
By: StAverti. on 20 May 12, 06:55:38
Brilliant deduction, photosynthesis produces sugars for plants to metabolize.... but were do the building blocks of the cells come from? Does photosynthesis produce nitrogen? Calcium? Phosphorus? oh right, those plant nutrients are not affected by photosynthesis, but are absorbed by roots from the soil...Oh and photosynthesis makes water from CO2 also right? And photosynthesis thermally regulates the plant too....?
By: oldschoolgreentube. on 19 May 12, 21:00:56
(continued 2) occurs. Mesophyll cells absorb the carbon dioxide transferred from the surrounding air by the stomata.? Carbon combines with water to create sugars that form the basis of plant growth. The by product of this process is Oxygen and this is released back into the atmosphere. Thats pretty basic right? CO2 is plant food.