Carbon Dioxide - Good or Bad for the Earth?

Question

CO2 is a Greenhouse Effect gas, yet plant-life needs CO2 to grow and produce oxygen (O2). Is the increase in Carbon Dioxide a good thing, a bad thing, or neither - as it balances out all effects in the end?

Answer 1

The earth doesn't care one way or the other but it is good for plant life and in turn for the animals that rely on them.

Answer 2

yes all that you've mentioned is true. Carbon Dioxide is indeed both needed in earth, it is both good and bad... it is important in the gas cycle of us humans and our environment, specifically the plants that surround us. that is what we have learned back in elementary years: the endless "cycle": human - carbon dioxide - plant - oxygen and so on the cycle continues. each is a very basic part of the said cycle... we need oxygen given out by plants and exchange they need carbon dioxide to go on with photosynthesis, right?

so you asked what happens if there is excess excretion of carbon dioxide? yeah what happens...

as you mentioned CO2 is a greenhouse effect gas, which is true! in my perception, what comes in my mind when i hear "greenhouse effect" is heat actually. and other than air pollution and extravagant tree loggings, the greenhouse effect is also another reason for global warming!

actually all this things are connected to each other!

people get more and more each year which means more pollution, more carbon dioxide, more need of resources and so less remaining natural resources and less space!

actually there is supposed to be a balance between nature and us humans, but today not anymore!

trees are being cut, lots of forests are being vanquished! wildlife is disappearing. whats going on in this world! we should keep it cool, but no, man is doing it way over!

we have to admit it really... garbage is seen almost every where, there are lots of cities with no trees... many natural calamities are occurring, floods of all types, earthquakes, and surely global warming...

it would be OK if there were a balance, if there were just more plants and trees to absorb these CO2 and more of nature to fix our mistakes!

i think that mother nature truly is taking her revenge todays!

soon, the ozone will totally perish and the whole world will flood! yes, it is not far from reality!

i meant GLOBAL FLOODING!

not until we do something about it! so people it is up to us... anyway what you give is what you get right?

it is up to humanity what to do...

peace! LET'S SAVE MOTHER NATURE!

IT IS NOT YET TOO LATE WE CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!

Answer 3

Good Question and one that takes us back to the original environmental concern about the rainforests.Maybe it really is simple as planting more trees.

Answer 4

Water is both good and bad for earth. A drop when thirsty is great. A drop when flooding is bad. Water can carry disease. This is the same with CO2. Some CO2 is good as it warms earth and allow more sun collection. But as the earth warms and follows by CO2 being released by the warming oceans and causing more warming and sun collection. Plants need Co2, humans expel CO2. Plants expel oxygen and humans need oxygen. AND LIFE GOES ON

Answer 5

It is excellent for the environment. Study after study shows plants growing 20 to 40% better. And, those in drought situations do even better and need less water.

As for the CO2 warming, no evidence supports this claim.

Answer 6

hamsoy - Ozone is also a greenhouse gas.

Carbon dioxide is a natural and vital component of our atmosphere, without it there would be no plants, no food and no oxygen.

In my student days, I used to work as a part time greenhouse technician, we would add CO2 to make the plants grow stronger and quicker as it is the critical rate limiting factor for photosynthesis.

As to how much is too much. The sciences on that point is very uncertain and contradictory, despite Al Gore's hysterical propaganda. The climate models are useful tools for learning to understand the climate, but are nowhere good enough to make reliable predictions.

An example is the question of 'In the carbon cycle, how long does CO2 stay in the atmosphere'. Such experimental evidence that exists suggests that it is 5 -20 years, but the figure th IPCC use is 50 - 200 years. Where did they get this figure from? It is th figure needed to make the man made doomsday scenario work.

In reality scientists are not sure if the planet is heating up, cooling down or staying stable, but are obliged to pay lip service to man made global warming if they don't want to commit professional suicide.

Answer 7

both,  bad for us and the plants if there's too much. If it's from living things and decomposition then it's good, if it's from coal then it's bad. Trees don't like too much co2 either. They'll die and release more co2.

Answer 8

CO2 is a good thing when is found in small quantities like the amount before we discovered coal and oil. If there is too much  CO2 its doesnt let the heat escape and the earth gradually gets hotter. To ans ur question its a good thing (when there isnt alot) bad thing (when there is too much)

Answer 9

Yup...it's plant food and it's awesome!  There are no bad effects from it.

Answer 10

both because without it plants would die though they would evolve to not need it, and it is good because we need some warmth that it brings. And bad because to much of it causes run away global warming!

Answer 11

If our plants were consuming all the CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere, from fossil fuels, from plant decomposition, then we would say that CO2 is performing its necessary function.

But with widespread drought, desertification, deforestation, we are not getting that much CO2 consumed. We are doing damned little to reverse the desertification, deforestation and drought, so perhaps until we are doing something about those causes of reduced CO2 consumption, we should be doing something to reduce our input of further new CO2 from fossil fuels.

Irrigation of forested areas and replanting forests in areas of high rainfall has the  prospect of most rapidly absorbing CO2.

This is a form of sequestering CO2 in the bodies of those trees that gives us back the oxygen we need, at the expense of some water.

Our oceans are becoming dead zones because plants are absorbing CO2 at the surface, then sinking into the ocean to decompose, absorbing oxygen and releasing CO2. This gives us a major source of renewable fuel that urgently needs to be harvested, for our own and the animal life in the oceans benefit.

It is not the CO2 in the oceans that is killing animal life, but the lack of oxygen. The oxygen is needed to decompose the plant matter.

In absence of oxygen not only will animal life perish, but the plant life will settle down to ocean bottom to become fossil fuel of future eons.  Rebuilding the fossil fuel base of earth is not a catastrophe. But killing the animal life of the oceans is.

Answer 12

Fat - good or bad for the body?

Well, if you have any intelligence whatsoever, you will understand...moderation.

Answer 13

Why not just plant trees and other green growing things that will eat the carbon and release oxygen for people and animals to breath. I know it is a stretch for AGW believers out there but each and every Co2 molecule out there contains two oxygen atoms for every carbon atom. If we pump the Co2 underground or shoot it into space pretty soon we will run out of oxygen atoms and we will all stop breathing.

Remember Co2 equals

Two oxygen atoms and only one carbon atom.

Green growing things eat the carbon as food and release the oxygen for us to breath.

If we sequester Co2 or shoot it into space we are eliminating the very oxygen we need for us to breath and stay alive from the atmosphere.

So do not sequester Co2 in any fashion, plant lots of green growing things so we can continue to breath and stay alive and healthy.