Plants Play Larger Role Than Thought in Cleaning up Air Pollution

From the National Science Foundation:

“Plants clean our air to a greater extent than we had realized,” says NCAR scientist Thomas Karl, the lead author.

The National Arbor Day foundation has been saying the same things for years. About.com has this as item #6 in their Top 10 Reasons Why Trees Are Valuable and Important. Of course these pronouncements didn’t require an NSF Grant to find out. I can’t say enough positive things about trees, and I encourage readers to plant them at every opportunity.

Chemicals known as oxygenated volatile organic compounds (oVOCs) affect environment, human health

Photo of a forest with mountains in the background.

Poplars, aspens, other trees provide extensive “ecosystem services.”

Credit and Larger Version

Vegetation plays an unexpectedly large role in cleansing the atmosphere, a new study finds.

The research, led by scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colo., uses observations, gene expression studies, and computer modeling to show that deciduous plants absorb about a third more of a common class of air-polluting chemicals than previously thought.

The new study, results of which are being published this week in Science Express, was conducted with co-authors from the University of Northern Colorado and the University of Arizona. It was supported in part by the National Science Foundation (NSF), NCAR’s sponsor.

“Plants clean our air to a greater extent than we had realized,” says NCAR scientist Thomas Karl, the lead author. “They actively consume certain types of air pollution.”

The research team focused on a class of chemicals known as oxygenated volatile organic compounds (oVOCs), which can have long-term impacts on the environment and human health.

“The team has made significant progress in understanding the complex interactions between plants and the atmosphere,” says Anne-Marie Schmoltner of NSF’s Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences, which funded the research.

The compounds form in abundance in the atmosphere from hydrocarbons and other chemicals that are emitted from both natural sources–including plants–and sources related to human activities, including vehicles and construction materials.

The compounds help shape atmospheric chemistry and influence climate.

Eventually, some oVOCs evolve into tiny airborne particles, known as aerosols, that have important effects on both clouds and human health.

By measuring oVOC levels in a number of ecosystems in the United States and other countries, the researchers determined that deciduous plants appear to be taking up the compounds at an unexpectedly fast rate–as much as four times more rapidly than previously thought.

The uptake was especially rapid in dense forests and most evident near the tops of forest canopies, which accounted for as much as 97 percent of the oVOC uptake that was observed.

Karl and his colleagues then tackled a follow-up question: How do plants absorb such large quantities of these chemicals?

The scientists moved their research into their laboratories and focused on poplar trees. The species offered a significant advantage in that its genome has been sequenced.

The team found that when the study trees were under stress, either because of a physical wound or because of exposure to an irritant such as ozone pollution, they began sharply increasing their uptake of oVOCs.

At the same time, changes took place in expression levels of certain genes that indicated heightened metabolic activity in the poplars.

The uptake of oVOCs, the scientists concluded, appeared to be part of a larger metabolic cycle.

Plants can produce chemicals to protect themselves from irritants and repel invaders such as insects, much as a human body may increase its production of white blood cells in reaction to an infection.

But these chemicals, if produced in enough quantity, can become toxic to the plant itself.

In order to metabolize these chemicals, the plants start increasing the levels of enzymes that transform the chemicals into less toxic substances.

At the same time, as it turns out, the plant draws down more oVOCs, which can be metabolized by the enzymes.

“Our results show that plants can actually adjust their metabolism and increase their uptake of atmospheric chemicals as a response to various types of stress,” says Chhandak Basu of the University of Northern Colorado, a co-author.

“This complex metabolic process within plants has the side effect of cleansing our atmosphere.”

Once they understood the extent to which plants absorb oVOCs, the research team fed the information into a computer model that simulates chemicals in the atmosphere worldwide.

The results indicated that, on a global level, plants are taking in 36 percent more oVOCs than had previously been accounted for in studies of atmospheric chemistry.

Additionally, since plants are directly removing the oVOCs, fewer of the compounds are evolving into aerosols.

“This really transforms our understanding of some fundamental processes taking place in our atmosphere,” Karl says.

-NSF-

Media Contacts

Cheryl Dybas, NSF (703) 292-7734 cdybas@nsf.gov

David Hosansky, NCAR (303) 497-8611 hosansky@ucar.edu

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

50 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
North of 43 and south of 44
October 22, 2010 5:13 pm

ROTFLMBFOA no kidding Dick Tracy.
MY those guvment scientist are really smart. Behind the times but smart just the same 😉 .

October 22, 2010 5:22 pm

I’m Shocked!
It’s better than we thought! for once…

Wansbeck
October 22, 2010 5:28 pm

Perhaps the best example of the effect of plants on the environment is the Royal Navy’s actions on Ascension Island:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11137903

Bill H
October 22, 2010 5:38 pm

what? they under estimated the uptake of VOC’s??
what is a person to do…
what else have they under estimated the ability of our earth to maintain balance?
CLIMATE change, AWG, Disruption….. is it real or memorex?

October 22, 2010 5:45 pm

Does this mean that we aren’t all gonna die?
Or, does it mean we shouldn’t be eating all those helpful plants?
😉

Curiousgeorge
October 22, 2010 5:48 pm

Gee, I thought I was just growing several thousand trees for the money when I cut them down. Who knew I was saving the planet? Reckon I can get paid the same for not cutting them down? 😉 Nahh.

October 22, 2010 5:51 pm

I tried to tell people that on digg. I said that people who burn oil and natural gas aren’t burning the forest. The bright fellow, Archiesteel he called himself, said both cause “AGW”. In fact the issues with deforestation are legion. Trees cool by shade and vaporization (must more significant than any effect of co2). Forests hold the soil and clean the water. Furthermore reinstatement of marshes could help to reduce the nutrients in water that is thought to harm coral (not global warming). There are legitimate environmental issues, co2 is at the bottom of the list.

Eric Gisin
October 22, 2010 6:42 pm

Conifers are the main source of VOCs (terpenes). I think this is a side effect of producing pitch, a natural pesticide.

Barbara
October 22, 2010 6:50 pm

NASA began studies on this phenomenon as far back as the 1980’s, studying VOCs as they related to indoor spaces such as space capsules. They knew, studies published in 1984, that houseplants could remove compounds such as formaldeyhyde and benzene from the air, and the percentages relative to size of room and plant. Dr. B. C. Wolverton was involved in NASA designs for a lunar habitat.
By 1996: How to Grow Fresh Air, by Dr. B. C. Wolverton, sold in the houseplant section of bookstores.

Phil's Dad
October 22, 2010 7:07 pm

Vegetarians should be locked up!

October 22, 2010 7:10 pm

Industrialized agriculture has made the U.S. the worlds “bread basket”. The use of grain alcohol in gasoline has caused an increase in the price of grain (surprise), forcing some people in the third world to “slash and burn” the rain forest. Whatever inconvenience these would-be lords of carbon cause developed countries will be insignificant compared to the misery they will levy on the developing world.
“Gee, I thought I was just growing several thousand trees for the money when I cut them down. Who knew I was saving the planet?” – Curiousgeorge
I also mentioned that foresting operations were one of the best friends of the forest! The “environmentalists” will put them out of business.

Curiousgeorge
October 22, 2010 7:27 pm

DitelHead says:
October 22, 2010 at 7:10 pm
Industrialized agriculture has made the U.S. the worlds “bread basket”. The use of grain alcohol in gasoline has caused an increase in the price of grain (surprise), forcing some people in the third world to “slash and burn” the rain forest. Whatever inconvenience these would-be lords of carbon cause developed countries will be insignificant compared to the misery they will levy on the developing world.
“Gee, I thought I was just growing several thousand trees for the money when I cut them down. Who knew I was saving the planet?” – Curiousgeorge
I also mentioned that foresting operations were one of the best friends of the forest! The “environmentalists” will put them out of business.

Fortunately, there are very few “environmentalists” ( or EPA critters for that matter ) in my part of the country. One could say they are on the endangered list. 😉 We do, however, have an abundance of good ol’ Southern boys and girls. 🙂

October 22, 2010 8:18 pm

Of course these pronouncements didn’t require an NSF Grant to find out. I can’t say enough positive things about trees, and I encourage readers to plant them at every opportunity.
Excellent! May I add something else to consider, planting fruit, nut and berry producing trees at every opportunity. Not only are they healthy for you, they produce the most healthy, anti-toxin nutrition that nature provides. Even if you don’t eat what’s produced, wildlife and birds will benefit greatly. I’ve gone totally into planting fruit and berry producing trees on my land (Critter Junction) in the Ozark National Forest, Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area.
There’s nothing better for a cool yard than a tree canopy! I leave a few open places with rye, clover and Kentucky bluegrass for the deer, turkeys and rabbits. I have 2 years of split firewood left from the Jan, 09 ice storm, both unfortunately & fortunately.
Reminds me of the Ole Swimming Hole
An man in Louisiana had owned a large farm for several years. He had a large pond in the back.
It was properly shaped for swimming, so he fixed it up nice with picnic tables, horseshoe pits, some apple and peach trees. Place for family and friends to get together.
One evening the ol’ farmer decided to go down to the pond, as he hadn’t been there for a while, and look it over.
He grabbed a five-gallon bucket to bring back some fruit.
As he neared the pond, he heard voices shouting and laughing with glee.
As he came closer, he saw it was a bunch of young women skinny-dipping in his pond.
He made the women aware of his presence and they all swam to the deep end.
One of the women shouted to him, ‘We’re not coming out until you leave!’
The old man frowned, ‘I didn’t come down here to watch you ladies swim naked or make you get out of the pond.’
Holding the bucket up he said, ‘I’m here to feed the
alligator.’

NovaReason
October 22, 2010 9:13 pm

Thanks, Ed Murphy
You just made me laugh harder than at the last few pictures of Pachuri that I’ve seen. (really, who told that guy that his look is acceptable for a public face of an organization? He apparently needs to hire a few consultants of his own)

October 22, 2010 9:15 pm

So, let’s see: trees themselves emit volatile organic compounds (NB: the “smoke” of the Great Smokey Mountains). The VOCs react with ambient ozone, to make oxygenated VOCs. The trees then re-absorb the oxygenated VOCs.
It’s not like trees need local ozone to oxygenate VOCs for them. They have a very sophisticated oxygen-activating metabolism. So, something else is going on. I’d wonder whether the re-absorbed oVOCs are reduced back to the parent VOCs and then re-emitted. A nice C-13 experiment would test that possibility.
If so, the chemistry would be: VOC —-> oVOC
O3 —-> O2
oVOC —-> VOC (recycled in the tree)
The VOCs and oVOCs cancel, with the net result: O3 —-> O2
High ambient ozone is very irritating to trees and plants (and humans). So, maybe what’s really going on is that the trees and plants are managing their local air quality by removing some of the ozone. The whole operation may have nothing to do with removing hydrocarbon “pollution” at all.
Ozone is produced naturally in air by the action of ultraviolet light (and lightning). So, one might expect trees to be more active in emitting and re-absorbing VOCs on hot sunny clear-sky days.
I don’t think trees are especially bothered by ambient VOCs; especially their own. So, calling VOCs “air pollution” as Tom Karl does, is a bit tendentious.
One might also guess that the VOCs are emitted in general to irritate and drive off predaceous insects.

kramer
October 22, 2010 10:23 pm

If trees absorb more a third more GW gasses, this could mean we’ll be paying foreign countries a third more to sequester our carbon…

CRS, Dr.P.H.
October 22, 2010 10:31 pm

Lord, do we pay tax money to support this stuff?? Bill Wolverton & his team at NASA figured this out in the early 1970’s!
http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/Spinoff2007/ps_3.html
I guess the thing to do is to wait until people forget & then reapply for new funding….

John F. Hultquist
October 22, 2010 10:56 pm

This really transforms our understanding of some fundamental processes taking place in our atmosphere,” Karl says.
I’ve always described Earth’s natural systems as a large and complex tapestry. Some important parts are seen, some are not. As for the design, one can begin to see that long before the final weft thread is inserted.
Regarding the above quote, where is it stated that every study that incrementally adds to our understanding of natural systems has to be reported as transformational? The measurement and documentation provided via this work can be appreciated. Does it transform our understanding of fundamental processes? Hardly. No more than the last short thread fundamentally transforms a tapestry. For those under a certain age: No more than the addition of the last pixel fundamentally transforms a 10 MB digital image.

John F. Hultquist
October 22, 2010 11:19 pm

CRS, Dr.P.H. at 10:31
A related item:
This fellow, Eugene P. Odum, and others* studied “southern river swamps.” Someplace I have one of his small reports. I recall the statement that the swamps are like a kidney cleaning up waste products.
I don’t know if Odum and Wolverton knew or worked with one another but they worked on related issues and in the SE USA.

Pete
October 23, 2010 1:25 am

Ed Murphy > too funny 🙂
If you would like to maximise yield from your fruit/nut woodland area, research “forest gardening” aka “food forest”. I can highly recommend a book by Martin Crawford (agroforestry.co.uk) – Creating a forest garden – there is some warmist group think opinionated within, but the plethora of plant advice makes up for it 😉 . Plant wise, it’s aimed at cool temperate zones, but the design concepts translate well to other zones – sub/tropical zones are covered well by Geoff Lawton on youtube/DVD. It’s really about stacking/layers using edible perennials and self seeders under the edible canopy layer, guilds of plants grouped for mutual benefit (e.g. N. Fixing shrub as scaffold for climber) to maximise yield for minimum effort.

Richard
October 23, 2010 1:29 am

I am partial to small quantities of a particular oVOC myself. The particular one is C2H5OH.
Organic compound Check (carbon based)
Oxygenated Check (contains oxygen)
Volatile Check (boiling point 78.4C)
Long live some oVOCs (-:P

Stephen Brown
October 23, 2010 2:09 am

Hamlet, Act 1, Scene V
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
Still true today!

Speed
October 23, 2010 3:23 am

Plants Play Larger Role Than Thought in Cleaning up Air Pollution
What is the mechanism by which Thought cleans up air pollution?

DaveF
October 23, 2010 3:57 am

Does this mean that if you go and walk around in the countryside, you get to breathe fresh air? Wow!

James Bull
October 23, 2010 4:24 am

The Victorians spent a lot of time and money planting trees all over British towns and cities to make the air better for people living in highly polluted industrial areas.

Verified by MonsterInsights