The Earth's biosphere is booming, data suggests that CO2 is the cause, part 2

The SeaWiFS instrument aboard the Seastar satellite has been collecting ocean data since 1997. By monitoring the color of reflected light via satellite, scientists can determine how successfully plant life is photosynthesizing. A measurement of photosynthesis is essentially a measurement of successful growth, and growth means successful use of ambient carbon. This animation shows an average of 10 years worth of SeaWiFS data. Dark blue represents warmer areas where there tends to be a lack of nutrients, and greens and reds represent cooler nutrient-rich areas which support life. The nutrient-rich areas include coastal regions where cold water rises from the sea floor bringing nutrients along and areas at the mouths of rivers where the rivers have brought nutrients into the ocean from the land.

I first ran a story with this title in 2008, with these graphics from SEAWIFS, showing a growing biosphere. Now a new study using a different methodology, Leaf Area Index (LAI), have determined that indeed, the LAI is on the increase. Those global warming proponents, who consider themselves “green” get very upset when it is pointed out that CO2 is “plant food”, yet here we have even more evidence that Gaia’s greenery likes it.

From World Climate Report:

Global Greening Continues: Did We Cause It?

You know the story. Humans are burning fossil fuels and because of their actions, the world is now warming at an unprecedented pace. This warming is stressing ecosystems throughout the world with devastating consequences to vegetation from one end of the earth to the other. If we do not act fast, we will destroy the planet and have a tough time facing our grandchildren. We can all hear it now—why didn’t you do something when there was still time to save the Earth?

Two articles have appeared recently in the scientific literature with results that may make us reconsider this entire affair. The first appears in the Journal of Geographical Sciences dealing with worldwide trends in the vigor of vegetation since the early 1980s—the results may surprise you, but they did not surprise us given all that has been written on this subject and certainly covered at World Climate Report.

Three Chinese scientists (all with the last name of Liu) used satellite data to detect changes occurring in vegetation throughout the world. Rather than use the popular satellite-based Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), Liu et al. (a.k.a., Liu3) decided to use the Leaf Area Index (LAI). The scientists explain “LAI, defined as half the total leaf area per unit ground, is directly linked to vegetation activities and comparable among different ecosystems. It has removed the effects of spectral response, illumination and orbit drift during data acquisition. It should be better, at least theoretically, than NDVI as the indicator of vegetation status.” We will certainly trust their judgment.

As seen in their figure below (Figure1), the red colors absolutely dominate indicating an increase in vegetation status! Liu et al. declare:

“Results show that, over the past 26 years, LAI has generally increased at a rate of 0.0013 per year around the globe. The strongest increasing trend is around 0.0032 per year in the middle and northern high latitudes (north of 30°N). LAI has prominently increased in Europe, Siberia, Indian Peninsula, America and south Canada, South region of Sahara, southwest corner of Australia and Kgalagadi Basin; while noticeably decreased in Southeast Asia, southeastern China, central Africa, central and southern South America and arctic areas in North America.”

Quick geography question: where is the “Kgalagadi Basin”? Correct—in the Kalahari Desert of southern Africa.

Figure 1. Spatial distribution of linear trends in estimated LAI from July 1981–December 2006 (from Liu et al., 2010)

In commenting on the upward trend in LAI in the mid-to-high latitudes of the Northern Hemispheric, the trio states

“The growth of the vegetation in these middle and high latitude areas is mainly limited by temperature. Many studies correlating NDVI with land surface temperature indicate warming might be the most important factor accounting for the LAI increase in this area. Warming, causes longer active growing season length and higher growth magnitude, therefore leads to increase in LAI in this area.”

We accept their findings—we now believe that warming has been beneficial for vegetation throughout much of the Northern Hemisphere. As we look at the map above, we see red throughout many low latitude areas as well. The gloom and doomers of the climate change issue are not going to be happy with such positive results. Although not discussed in the Liu et al. paper, we cannot help but wonder what role elevated carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations may have played in stimulating plant growth in so many areas of the world? Feel free to examine all of our essays reporting on the biological benefits of elevated CO2, let alone the benefits of warming.

Few people would argue that the planet has warmed to some extent over the past three decades, and many people feel that humans caused at least some part of this warming through their consumption of fossil fuels. Well, hold the fort because our second featured article does not arrive at that conclusion whatsoever. The article was written by two scientists from Taiwan and was published recently in Atmospheric Science Letters. Lo and Hsu begin stating:

“The global mean temperature has been rising more abruptly over the past 30 years, compared with that in the previous 50–100 years. This recent warming has occurred in most areas on Earth, becoming a truly global phenomenon. The sudden acceleration of warming, which is particularly evident in the winter Northern Hemisphere (NH), can be linked with the observation of widespread abrupt changes in the late 1980s. The nature of the late 1980s’ warming and its relationship with the dominant teleconnection patterns such as the Arctic Oscillation (AO) and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) are explored in this study.”

We knew we would like this—nothing better than scientists explaining warming with teleconnections related things that operate largely without any association to the buildup of greenhouse gases. The authors conducted sophisticated research with climate models and greenhouse gas scenarios developed by the United Nations’ IPCC group. They found that warming in the extra-tropical Northern Hemisphere was highly related to the two teleconnections, and it led them to conclude (hold your breath) that their results “do not support the scenario that the emerging influence of the AO-like pattern in the late 1980s can be attributed to the anthropogenic greenhouse effect.” Indeed, they conclude that what we are seeing “can be attributed to natural variability.”

OK. The earth warmed over the past 30 years. We agree (although that has largely slowed down or even stopped in the past 10 years). Atmospheric CO2 has increased. We agree. The rise in CO2 caused the warming—not according to Lo and Hsu. The warming caused vegetation in the Northern Hemisphere to thrive—Liu et al. think so.

You get the message—warming and elevated CO2 are not combining to destroy the planet’s vegetation. Quite to the contrary, they may be a blessing!

References

Lo, T.-T. and H.-H. Hsu. 2010. Change in the dominant decadal patterns and the late 1980s abrupt warming in the extratropical Northern Hemisphere. Atmospheric Science Letters, 11, 210–215.

Liu, S., R. Liu, and Y. Liu. 2010. Spatial and temporal variation of global LAI during 1981–2006. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 20, 323-332.

5 1 vote
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

89 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Brian H
March 24, 2011 1:18 am

Chinese subversion of the Western consensus! This means war …

Jack
March 24, 2011 1:32 am

WOW!. Matches observation. Did not require elaborate computer modelling.

Pteradactyl
March 24, 2011 1:32 am

Great post – now show it to everyone in the MSM and see if there is any sort of reaction. My guess is that it will be ignored for now but the more that is posted like this the less chance of it being brushed under the carpet.

David
March 24, 2011 1:34 am

What is the US trend over this period? Inn the specific locations where greening trends are apparent, what are the more regional US temperature and percepitation trends? I think the US trend overall is down,and the world trend is flat since 1998. Perhaps CO2 and rainfall are just as, or more important then temperature.

March 24, 2011 1:36 am

You mean it’s better than we thought?

Gary Pearse
March 24, 2011 1:47 am

The greening looks strongest in the fringe south of the Sahara! Hmmm the desert advance stopped by co2 when nothng else would work. This may be related to the new snows of Kilimanjaro too because this greening needs more moisture or it preserves it and transpires it over an expanded period.

Dario
March 24, 2011 1:59 am

If you take a look at the previuous 2008 story, go to the “2004 study by Steven Running of the University of Montana and Ramakrishna Nemani of NASA”; you will see that the 2004 study (Climate-Driven Increases in Global Terrestrial Net Primary Production from 1982 to 1999, Science 6 June 2003: Vol. 300 no. 5625 pp. 1560-1563) has been recently cited in a VERY interesting article:
“Periodic climate cooling enhanced natural disasters and wars in China during AD 10–1900”, Proc. R. Soc. B 22 December 2010 vol. 277 no. 1701 3745-3753
(http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/277/1701/3745.abstract).
The title says it all, but, please, bring your attention to the last phase of the abstract (you can also download the full article):
“Our study suggests that food production during the last two millennia (!) has been more unstable during COOLER periods, resulting in more social conflicts owing to rebellions within the dynasties or/and southward aggressions from northern pastoral nomadic societies in ancient China”.
And this comes form the study of a TWO TOUSANDS years old society…
It’s worth to remember that the French historian Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie was led to the very same conclusions more than 40 years ago in his “Time of feast, time of famine” study about the history of climate since the 1000 A.D. (still a suggested reading for all those interested in the REAL history of climate), and this was the reason for the title of his book:
cooler period = time of famine
warmer period = time of feast
Just my 2 cents
Dario from Turin

martin brumby
March 24, 2011 2:03 am

Will Romm & Ward be the first “deniers” for these papers?

Richard B
March 24, 2011 2:04 am

So the warmists have been right all along. There is a greenhouse effect after all 🙂

AleaJactaEst
March 24, 2011 2:07 am

“Liu et al. (a.k.a., Liu3) ”
wouldn’t that be 3Lui rather than Lui>3; Lui>3 would suggest breeding.
;~)

AleaJactaEst
March 24, 2011 2:10 am

correction, Liu>3 .

meemoe_uk
March 24, 2011 2:15 am

“They found that warming in the extra-tropical Northern Hemisphere was highly related to the two teleconnections”
Teleconnections? I’ve not heard that term used before to mean ( variable \ measure \ quality \ factor ). I assoiciate it more with electric communication, phone lines and TV masts etc. Why did they use that term?

March 24, 2011 2:27 am

Anthony,
But, but.. There is a consensus by all scientists that burning fossil fuels is bad for the Earth, bad for plants, bad for everyone that isn’t owned by big oil.
Certianly the idea that warming might be natural has been disproven by Mann and Gore. There was even a Nobel Prize to prove it.
If we accept these two, peer reviewed and published articles as potentially valid, then the warming in the Arctic and loss of sea ice there might be natural and part of natural variation of the Earth’s climate. Not only that, the life on Earth is doing better because of the burning of fossil fuels.
It is clear that these scientists are simply tools of big oil, because all scientists believe in global warming. These apostate (can warmists use that word?) scientists must never get grants again, wait. They are from outside the US. Uh-oh.
I hope they have a long and productive careers. When AGW finally collapses, will the scientists that break it get the Nobel Prize too?

Ripper
March 24, 2011 2:33 am

When I see these studies I try and relate the results back to where I know what has happened.
I live in the red bit in Western Australia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meekatharra,_Western_Australia
Coincidentally one of my mates obtained a heap of photo’s circa 1965-1970 only a couple of weeks ago and after going through them ,the thing that stood out was how much less vegetation was here back then compared to now.

Alexander K
March 24, 2011 2:44 am

Who would have possibly dreamed that a little more warmth plus a tiny bit more CO2 plus a smidgen more moisture would make plants grow better? Golly, wonders will never cease! 🙂 Sarc off.

Brian H
March 24, 2011 2:58 am

Gary Pearse says:
March 24, 2011 at 1:47 am

National Geographic spilled the beans on the Sahara long ago:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/090731-green-sahara_2.html
meemoe_uk says:
March 24, 2011 at 2:15 am

teleconnections are distant linked climate phenomena. Causality may or may not be known, but reliable observation and prediction has established a pattern exists.
Ripper says:
March 24, 2011 at 2:33 am

Love to see the before and after shots (you might have to create those!) Any chance you could scan them and make them available?

Hector Pascal
March 24, 2011 3:11 am

Ripper.
Post-war gummint policy in WA (I’m a sandgroper wrinkly) was slash and burn in the wheatbelt, and run sheep over the rest. Economics have fixed that. Unsustainable farming practices have proven unsustainable. I know someone in Kalbarri making a good living harvesting goats.

March 24, 2011 3:13 am

Ripper says: (March 24, 2011 at 2:33 am)
When I see these studies I try and relate the results back to where I know what has happened.
     Very nice comment, Ripper. I noticed that red patch too, and was delighted to see it.
     Red in the west usually means you are sending us a heatwave here in Melbourne — where it is quite cold tonight. In this case it means greening and hallelujah!
     Wonderful news (but don’t tell ol’ Flan.)
p.s. Any way you could show us Ripper’s photos, Anthony?

John Hume
March 24, 2011 3:18 am

Plants grow quicker at higher temperatures; tree rings get thicker; more CO2 gets consumed. No worries

March 24, 2011 3:22 am

This is more evidence that CO2 is both harmless and beneficial. And there is still no evidence that CO2 causes any global problems. No evidence whatever.
A cold planet is the norm. We are due for a return to the norm. Therefore, more CO2 production is essential. And as the chart shows, rises in CO2 follow rises in temperature. Effect cannot precede cause; CO2 is simply a function of temperature. [CO2 may cause some minuscule warming, but it is insignificant.]
The current very *mild* warming cycle of only 0.7°C over the past century and a half has happened many times in the past. It is natural climate variability.
Conclusion: CO2 is beneficial and harmless. It is entirely benign. More is better. And the CO2=CAGW conjecture is once again refuted.

Tenuc
March 24, 2011 3:22 am

Nice to see legacy knowledge being confirmed by modern research…
The Medieval Climatic Optimum ~1000 to 1350 AD – Plants, animals & man do well.
The Little Ice Age ~1550 to 1840 AD – Plants, animals & man struggle.
Our planet is a better place for the biosphere to live when it’s warm and wet.

Peter Stroud
March 24, 2011 3:26 am

Mr Roger Harrabin, have you read this post? If so will you please join the BBC Today programme and tell the listeners about it. Give it the same attention you give to every paper that describes the doom and gloom caused by anthropogenic global warming.

Steve C
March 24, 2011 3:35 am

“Warm” thanks to our Chinese colleagues for some climate research which actually involved research rather than modelling. Yes, we must mention these papers as often as possible in the Mawkish Scaremongering Media.
Meanwhile, in the UK, our brainwashed Chancellor of the Exchequer oozes a Budget still based on scary fairy stories about “carbon” and continuing the arbitrary racking up of energy prices. There’s a down for every up.

Brian H
March 24, 2011 3:35 am

Smokey;
cold is the norm for the last few million years. Before that there were long periods when 10°C hotter was the norm. There are lotsa Norms. And lotsa norms, too. 😉
But humans do best at about 3-5°C warmer than now.

Brian H
March 24, 2011 3:37 am

Newsflash: Tips & Notes is (I think) in the process of being “cleaned”. The comments box is gone for the moment.

1 2 3 4