The Gas of Life

By Jim Goodridge  – former California State Climatologist

Photosynthesis simply stated is 6CO2 + 6H2O + photons = C6H12O6+6O2.

It is suggested by the relative abundances of atmospheric CO2 and O2,

That CO2 is a quite active material and it is always in short supply.

Plant growth is basically the chemical reaction of storing solar energy.

Chemical reactions generally double with an increase of 10°F.

Rising temperatures cause CO2 to boil out of ocean water.

Rising temperature and CO2 concentration both stimulate plant growth.

Our atmosphere originally contained about 30 percent CO2.

The era of chlorophyll dominance is referred to as the Great Oxidation.

This happened 2.5 billion years ago. The ocean’s dissolved iron.

Rusted out, producing our planets iron ore deposits and releasing oxygen.

Chlorophyll is still the mechanism controlling the CO2 and O2 abundance.

All life forms basically originated by a photosynthesis process.

Chemically our hemoglobin and chlorophyll are quite similar.

Suggesting a common origin, that is supported by common DNA code.

Where as animals do not photosynthesize, their plant foods do.

Beef, chicken or fish feed off photosynthetic products.

It is mainly trace minerals that supplement photo-source.

CO2 is literally the gas of life for all macro life forms we encounter.

The existence of extremophiles suggests very early non-solar energy sources.

Demonizing CO2 started with the plan for peaceful use of atomic bombs.

The big dream in 1946 that was that atomic energy would be so cheap,

That electricity would never again need to be metered.

The attribution of increased CO2 to fossil fuel burning was born here.

Atomic energy advocates wanted to save Earth from runaway GH heating like Venus.

A conservation ethic developed to conserve the finite petroleum for the future and

Anti-pollution and anti-growth advocates added voices to the anti- CO2 theme.

All earthly macro life forms are photosynthically derived from CO2,

Either directly or indirectly by chlorophyll that absorbs solar photons.

We are not here not at the whim of a deity but by evolution of CO2 derivatives.

================================================================

Note: Jim’s line, The attribution of increased CO2 to fossil fuel burning was born here.

There’s a tremendous backstory to this which I have been chasing for awhile. See this post from the earlier days of WUWT in 2008. If anyone can help find it, I’d be appreciative.

Scavenger Hunt: find the lump of coal

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

76 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 29, 2012 3:06 pm

This is a wonderful short synopsis of the CO2 situation. Thanks for this post!

APACHEWHOKNOWS
February 29, 2012 3:11 pm

Moderators etal of Watts Up With That
over on http://www.hotair.com
Post there on a poll about 2/3’s of Americans belive AGW is real.
317 post so far, a poster with nic,,,
trible,,,
is calling out the $44,000.00 from Heartland
He was chalanged to come on here and tell Anthony how unethical that Anthony is.
Watch for that poster, you might check out his post, his posting style will clue you if he comes under another nic.

February 29, 2012 3:35 pm

The whole thing is a natural self-regulating system. As temperatures rise, oceans slowly warm generating additional CO2 into the atmosphere because warm weather favors plants which need the extra CO2. When temperatures decline, oceans slowly cool and absorb CO2 from the atmosphere because cool weather means less plant growth hence lower CO2 requirements. This system is not by accident.

February 29, 2012 3:43 pm

History will look back in amazement at the Carbon Dioxide Demonisation Era.

Merovign
February 29, 2012 3:44 pm

I’m not sure *inviting* trolls here is the best policy.
HA is and always has been dominated by the trolls – one shows up, and *everything* discussed is about *them*. Nothing useful survives.
The behavior should be discouraged, not spread.

APACHEWHOKNOWS
February 29, 2012 3:58 pm

Merovign,
Your correct, just wanted to shut him up on calling Anthony names.
Not worth the time.

John Cooper
February 29, 2012 3:59 pm

…yet another example of how leftists hate life.

R. de Haan
February 29, 2012 4:07 pm

“Atomic energy advocates wanted to save Earth from runaway GH heating like Venus”.
Which is a BSB (Bad Science Based) argument.

Acorn1 - San Diego
February 29, 2012 4:11 pm

Alan Love says we’ll look back in amazement….true, and how soon?
In a few years, decades maybe, we will also realize that higher levels of
CO2 in the atmos are truly beneficial..! We’ll use this to help feed our
seven billion and growing population. Many studies show up on
http://Www.CO2science.org
And how about temperature, too? Beneficial, if it’s up…!

DesertYote
February 29, 2012 4:11 pm

The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is directly related to the rate of ukariote metabolism which is directly related to temperature. Soda-pop fizz is just part of the relationship.

R. de Haan
February 29, 2012 4:11 pm

And with the CO2 scare thrown under the bus now we’re ready for the next scare which will be introduced by planting the UN flag on the bottom of our oceans.
By Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh Full Story
The World Oceans Summit in Singapore is the latest platform for United Nations World Bank to announce its latest assault on sovereign economic decisions and freedom. The oceans are suddenly very sick and “we need coordinated global action to restore our oceans to health,” says World Bank president Robert Zoellick.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/44945

ChE
February 29, 2012 4:17 pm

APACHEWHOKNOWS –
Careful with the commas. Somebody might mistake you for Gleick.

Philip Bradley
February 29, 2012 4:26 pm

There was a study recently that strongly indicated that trees, and presumably all plants, grow taller to access more CO2, rather than more sunlight as was believed.

Benjamin D Hillicoss
February 29, 2012 4:37 pm

always thought the gas of life was…methane….. between me, my five brothers, my father and my son, my life is never short of methane

Dale
February 29, 2012 4:55 pm

Sorry for the OT.
But can anyone explain to this lay-person what the sun is doing? SSN is now down to around 50 in February, and solar flux is dropping too. Aren’t we supposed to be still rising to cycle 24 peak?
http://www.solen.info/solar/

Agile Aspect
February 29, 2012 4:58 pm

And on a side note, the burning of hydrocarbons produces slightly more water than carbon dioxide.
If you’re worried about the so-called “greenhouse effect” of carbon dioxide, then your concern may be misplaced.

Graphite
February 29, 2012 5:25 pm

Could someone with more scientific knowledge than I have (pretty much everyone) please re-write this paragraph:
“This happened 2.5 billion years ago. The ocean’s dissolved iron.
Rusted out, producing our planets iron ore deposits and releasing oxygen.”
Should it be: This happened 2.5 billion years ago. The ocean’s dissolved iron
rusted out, producing our planet’s iron ore deposits and releasing oxygen.
(I had to read it a few times to figure out whether “dissolved” was a verb (and the possessive in “ocean’s” didn’t belong) or adjectival on “iron”.)
There are a few others. The word processing program used seems to have decided that this piece should be rendered as free verse, with every line starting with a capital letter and ending with a full stop.
As an observation, people can broadly be split into two groups — arty and scientificky. Those of us who fall into the arty camp have real trouble following the argument when the scientificky types don’t pay due attention to the arty, i.e language, aspects when presenting their case.

Graphite
February 29, 2012 5:30 pm

Actually, as I have a warmist journalist lined up to send it to, I’d like the whole thing rewritten, with all the quirky punctuation and capitalisation fixed . . . and “where as” compressed into one word.

Anything is possible
February 29, 2012 5:33 pm

“Plant growth is basically the chemical reaction of storing solar energy.”
___________________________________________________________________________
So how much of this solar energy is stored without EVER manifesting itself as atmospheric heat?
If the right answer is anything other than zero, it would open up an enormous can of worms…….

Allan MacRae
February 29, 2012 5:39 pm

Jim Goodridge says:
Rising temperatures cause CO2 to boil out of ocean water.
pyeatte says: February 29, 2012 at 3:35 pm
The whole thing is a natural self-regulating system. As temperatures rise, oceans slowly warm generating additional CO2 into the atmosphere because warm weather favors plants which need the extra CO2. When temperatures decline, oceans slowly cool and absorb CO2 from the atmosphere because cool weather means less plant growth hence lower CO2 requirements. This system is not by accident.
DesertYote says: February 29, 2012 at 4:11 pm
The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is directly related to the rate of eukariote metabolism which is directly related to temperature. Soda-pop fizz is just part of the relationship.
___________________________________
Keep it up guys… … as the children say, when you get closer and closer to your objective:
“You’re getting warmer…”
Remember – CO2 lags temperature at all measured time scales.

Richdo
February 29, 2012 6:21 pm

@Anything is possible
“So how much of this solar energy is stored without EVER manifesting itself as atmospheric heat?”
I tried to do that calc a while back and came up with ~0.14w/m^2/yr (spreading the energy over the area of the earth) Can’t guarantee the math or unit conversions. If someone else wants to double check I’d appreciate it. Here’s the starting variables w/ref.
110 kcal/moleCO2 used in photosynthesis, avg of two references
http://www.fao.org/docrep/w7241e/w7241e05.htm#1.2.1%20photosynthetic%20efficiency
http://biosensitivefutures.org.au/overviews/principles/photosynthesis
210×10^9 tons CO2 fixed by earths plants per year http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2486.1998.00125.x/abstract

Bomber_the_Cat
February 29, 2012 6:25 pm

Graphite says:
February 29, 2012 at 5:25 pm
Could someone with more scientific knowledge than I have (pretty much everyone) please re-write this paragraph:
“This happened 2.5 billion years ago. The ocean’s dissolved iron.
Rusted out, producing our planets iron ore deposits and releasing oxygen.”
Should it be: This happened 2.5 billion years ago. The ocean’s dissolved iron
rusted out, producing our planet’s iron ore deposits and releasing oxygen.
——————————————————————————————————
Seems that you are more concerned about the grammar than the science Graphite. You introduced the apostrophe to planet’s correctly, but left in the incorrect apostrophe in Ocean’s. So it should be…
This happened 2.5 billion years ago. The oceans dissolved iron rusted out, producing our planet’s iron ore deposits and releasing oxygen.
However, even with this corrected, I don;t know what he means.but I think ‘rusted out’ must mean ‘precipitated out of solution’ .
So perhaps,,,,
This happened 2.5 billion years ago. The oceans dissolved iron precipitated out, producing our planet’s iron ore deposits and releasing oxygen.

Rosco
February 29, 2012 6:26 pm

I often wonder how all the “climate scientists” energy balance calculations account for an ever increasing Biomass – or do they just ignore it ?

Bomber_the_Cat
February 29, 2012 6:31 pm

I got that wrong. On re-reading oceans should be ocean’s. So….
The ocean’s dissolved iron precipitated out producing our planet’s iron ore deposits and releasing oxygen.

R. Shearer
February 29, 2012 6:51 pm

Forget the soda-pop fizz, CO2 is the cabonation in BEER.

1 2 3 4
Verified by MonsterInsights