CO2 is Green

From RationalWiki

A dirty dozen gems about denialism

Colony collapse disorder Conservative denial Conspiracy Denialism Germ theory denialism Global warming HIV denial Holocaust One single proof Willful ignorance Wishful thinking Young Earth creationism

CO₂ is Green, along with its sister organization Plants Need CO₂, is a global warming denialist pressure group in the United States lobbying against the classification of carbon dioxide as a pollutant. These organizations argue that since carbon dioxide is a vital chemical for plant life, more of it can only be a good thing, and that any reduction in CO₂ output would be harmful to the ecosystem and the economy - a view seen as complete and utter horseshit by anyone with any experience or knowledge of atmospheric chemistry or climate change.

[edit] Background

Unsurprisingly, the CO₂ is Green and Plants needs CO₂ groups are the creation of fossil fuel industry fat cats: specifically Leighton Steward, retired vice chairman of Burlington Resources oil and gas company, and Corbin J Robertson Jr, chief executive of Natural Resource Partners, a coal resourcing corporation, both based in Houston, Texas.^[1] Both organizations have applied for 501(C)(4) non-profit organization status, which would class them as charities and make donations non-taxable.^[2][3]

CO₂ is Green, with its aim of "educating" the public on the alleged dangers of reduced carbon emissions, has launched newspaper and television adverts in several states.^[4] The TV ads feature a montage of aesthetically chosen nature film footage and a soothing voiceover affirming that "higher CO₂ levels than we have today would help the earth's ecosystems and support more plant and animal life".^[5]

The CO₂ website urges readers to write to their Senator, Congressman, and the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, protesting against the classification of CO2 as a pollutant.

[edit] Bullshit claims

There are two central claims made by the CO₂ is Green pressure group; firstly, that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, and secondly that more of it will make the world better. Both are very wrong - at best they are simplifications of real science and twisted semantic; at worse, they are outright deceitful claims.

[edit] Not a pollutant

The adverts claim that "there is no scientific evidence that CO₂ is a pollutant". Of course, there is actually plenty of scientific evidence to show the effects of carbon dioxide on the atmosphere. The definition of a "pollutant", however, is a complicated issue to address.

If you define a pollutant as something actively and instantly harmful, carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. If you define it as something that can cause environmental problems and destabilise natural equilibrium when in non-normal concentrations, it certainly is a pollutant. We guess that CO₂ is Green are certainly playing around with their definitions when they make this claim. The nature and activity of a pollutant is also certainly dependent on concentration, bioaccumulation and other factors - even the most harmful substances in the world will have little or no effect in sufficiently small doses.

[edit] More carbon dioxide is good

Extract from the CO₂ is Green website.
That's right folk, the sun is cooling the earth. Quick, use lots more carbon fuels before it's too late!

The second claim - that more CO₂ will benefit the world - is patently false. It has absolutely no backing in science or reality. In the case of CO₂, it's not that the molecule itself is a dangerous pollutant or actively harmful, but rather that high concentrations of it have a much different effect than low concentrations. CO₂ may be "plant food" in the basic, Sunday-school version of how CO₂ cycles around the Earth, but this emphatically does not mean that more is good. Indeed, an increase in atmospheric concentration will accelerate the greenhouse effect, warming the planet; and plants will hardly be in need of all this extra food if they're all dying because the climate is changing too quick.

For examples, vitamin C is definitely good for you, but eating your own weight in oranges will just cause the body to excrete the excess as it wouldn't be needed, and in the worse-case scenario you could overdose on the substance and suffer very ill effects. An analogy can be made with a car and a fuel tank; it takes a certain amount of fuel to drive across town, but filling it with more fuel doesn't help you drive across town any better, and if anything, the extra weight would be detrimental to your performance. In a more relevant example, you do need a small amount carbon dioxide in your blood. This can be found in the blood around muscle tissue and, due to the changes in pH by the presence of carbonic acid, displaces oxygen from haemoglobin. Without the carbon dioxide there, oxygen wouldn't unload out of the blood and into the cells and respiration would not occur - CO₂ is good for you! In higher concentrations, however, carbon dioxide stays loaded onto haemoglobin and it's presence in the blood causes oxygen to be loaded onto haemoglobin less efficiently - more CO₂ is certainly not good for you.

Finally, plants are not the only sink for carbon dioxide. Most of it is permanently stored by being dissolved in the oceans. As the oceans warm up, the solubility of gases lowers (this is the reverse situation of the solubility of solids) and the oceans can't sink in as much CO₂ - so there'll be more of the gas in the atmosphere. What causes an increase in temperature? More of the gas in the atmosphere. So the cycle continues in a positive feedback mechanism, made worse by the increase in water vapour (due to higher temperatures) which is a stronger greenhouse gas than CO₂.

[edit] External Links

• CO₂ is Green
• Plants Need CO₂

[edit] See also

• Global warming conspiracy theory

[edit] Notes