Without plants, Earth would cook under billions of tons of additional carbon

Oct 16, 2013 by Morgan Kelly
Researchers based at Princeton University found that Earth's terrestrial ecosystems have absorbed 186 billion to 192 billion tons of carbon since the mid-20th century, which has significantly contained the global temperature and levels of carbon in the atmosphere. The study is the first to specify the extent to which plants have prevented climate change since pre-industrial times.

(Phys.org) —Enhanced growth of Earth's leafy greens during the 20th century has significantly slowed the planet's transition to being red-hot, according to the first study to specify the extent to which plants have prevented climate change since pre-industrial times. Researchers based at Princeton University found that land ecosystems have kept the planet cooler by absorbing billions of tons of carbon, especially during the past 60 years.

The planet's land-based "sink"—or carbon-storage capacity—has kept 186 billion to 192 billion tons of carbon out of the atmosphere since the mid-20th century, the report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. From the 1860s to the 1950s, land use by humans was a substantial source of the carbon entering the atmosphere because of deforestation and logging. After the 1950s, however, humans began to use land differently, such as by restoring forests and adopting agriculture that, while larger scale, is higher yield. At the same time, industries and automobiles continued to steadily emit that contributed to a botanical boom. Although a greenhouse gas and pollutant, carbon dioxide also is a plant nutrient.

Had Earth's terrestrial ecosystems remained a carbon source they would have instead generated 65 billion to 82 billion tons of carbon in addition to the carbon that it would not have absorbed, the researchers found. That means a total of 251 billion to 274 billion additional tons of carbon would currently be in the atmosphere. That much carbon would have pushed the atmosphere's current to 485 parts-per-million (ppm), the researchers report—well past the scientifically accepted threshold of 450 (ppm) at which the Earth's could drastically and irreversibly change. The current concentration is 400 ppm.

Those "" amount to a current average global temperature that is cooler by one-third of a degree Celsius (or a half-degree Fahrenheit), which would have been a sizeable jump, the researchers report. The planet has warmed by only 0.74 degrees Celsius (1.3 degrees Fahrenheit) since the early 1900s, and the point at which scientists calculate the global temperature would be dangerously high is a mere 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) more than pre-industrial levels.

The study is the most comprehensive look at the historical role of terrestrial ecosystems in controlling atmospheric carbon, explained first author Elena Shevliakova, a senior climate modeler in Princeton's Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. Previous research has focused on how plants might offset carbon in the future, but overlooked the importance of increased vegetation uptake in the past, she said.

"People always say we know carbon sinks are important for the climate," Shevliakova said. "We actually for the first time have a number and we can say what that sink means for us now in terms of carbon savings."

This video is not supported by your browser at this time.
This video shows the extent to which the land acted as a source of carbon in the atmosphere (brown areas), or a carbon "sink" (green areas) that absorbed carbon from the atmosphere from 1868 to 2000. The darker the color means the greater amount of carbon an area generated or absorbed. During the 1950s and 1960s, the land switched from being largely a carbon source to primarily acting as a carbon sink. The researchers found that had terrestrial ecosystems remained a carbon source then 251 billion to 274 billion additional tons of carbon would currently be in the atmosphere. Credit: Video by Sergey Malyshev, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology

"Changes in from land-use activities need to be carefully considered. Until recently, most studies would just take fossil-fuel emissions and land-use emissions from simple models, plug them in and not consider how managed lands such as recovering forests take up carbon," she said. "It's not just climate—it's people. On land, people are major drivers of changes in land carbon. They're not just taking carbon out of the land, they're actually changing the land's capacity to take up carbon."

Scott Saleska, an associate professor of ecology and at the University of Arizona who studies interactions between vegetation and climate, said that the researchers provide a potentially compelling argument for continued forest restoration and preservation by specifying the "climate impact" of vegetation. Saleska is familiar with the research but had no role in it.

"I think this does have implications for policies that try to value the carbon saved when you restore or preserve a forest," Saleska said. "This modeling approach could be used to state the complete 'climate impact' of preserving large forested areas, whereas most current approaches just account for the 'carbon impact.' Work like this could help forest-preservation programs more accurately consider the climate impacts of policy measures related to forest preservation."

Although the researchers saw a strong historical influence of carbon fertilization in carbon absorption, that exchange does have its limits, Saleska said. If carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere continue rising, more vegetation would be needed to maintain the size of the carbon sink Shevliakova and her colleagues reported.

"There is surely some limit to how long increasing carbon dioxide can continue to promote plant growth that absorbs carbon dioxide," Saleska said. "Carbon dioxide is food for plants, and putting more food out there stimulates them to 'eat' more. However, just like humans, eventually they get full and putting more food out doesn't stimulate more eating."

The researchers used the comprehensive Earth System Model (ESM2G), a climate-carbon cycle model developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Geophysical Fluid and Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL), to simulate how carbon and climate interacted with vegetation, soil and marine ecosystems between 1861 and 2005. The GFDL model predicted changes in climate and in atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide based on fossil fuel emissions of carbon. Uniquely, the model also predicted emissions from land-use changes—such as deforestation, wood harvesting and forest regrowth—that occurred from 1700 to 2005.

This video is not supported by your browser at this time.
From 1862-2005, human influence on the land spread (white areas, with cyan areas indicating undisturbed land), but during the mid-20th century humans significantly changed how they use the land. People have increasingly restored forests and adopted agriculture that, while larger scale, is higher yield, the researchers found. Many of the white areas correlate with the green, carbon-absorbing areas indicated on the animation above. As human land-use changed, industries and automobiles continued to steadily emit carbon dioxide that contributed to a botanical boom that further removed carbon from the atmosphere. Although a greenhouse gas and pollutant, carbon dioxide also is a plant nutrient. Credit: Video by Sergey Malyshev, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology

"Unless you really understand what the land-use processes are it's very hard to say what the system will do as a whole," said Shevliakova, who worked with corresponding author Stephen Pacala, Princeton's Frederick D. Petrie Professor in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology; Sergey Malyshev, a professional specialist in ecology and evolutionary biology at Princeton; GFDL physical scientists Ronald Stouffer and John Krasting; and George Hurtt, a professor of geographical sciences at the University of Maryland.

"After the 1940s and 1950s, if you look at the land-use change trajectory, it's been slowed down in the expansion of agriculture and pastures," Shevliakova said. "When you go from extensive agriculture to intensive agriculture you industrialize the production of food, so people now use fertilizers instead of chopping down more forests. A decrease in global deforestation combined with enhanced vegetation growth caused by the rapid increase in carbon dioxide changed the land from a into a carbon sink."

For scientists, the model is a significant contribution to understanding the terrestrial carbon sink, Saleska said. Scientists only uncovered the land-based about two decades ago, while models that can combine the effects of and vegetation growth have only been around for a little more than 10 years, Saleska said. There is work to be done to refine climate models and the Princeton-led research opens up new possibilities while also lending confidence to future climate projections, Saleska said.

"A unique value of this study is that it simulates the past, for which, unlike the future, we have observations," Saleska said. "Past observations about climate and carbon dioxide provide a test about how good the model simulation was. If it's right about the past, we should have more confidence in its ability to predict the future."

Explore further: NASA sees Tropical Storm playing polo with western Mexico

More information: The paper, "Historical warming reduced due to enhanced land carbon uptake," was published Oct. 15 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. www.pnas.org/content/early/201… /1314047110.abstract

Related Stories

Plants can change greenhouse gas emissions after warming

Aug 21, 2013

(Phys.org) —Different moorland plants, particularly heather and cotton grass, can strongly influence climate warming effects on greenhouse gas emissions, researchers from Lancaster University, The University ...

Recommended for you

NASA catches a weaker Edouard, headed toward Azores

5 hours ago

NASA's Aqua satellite passed over the Atlantic Ocean and captured a picture of Tropical Storm Edouard as it continues to weaken. The National Hurricane Center expects Edouard to affect the western Azores ...

Tree rings and arroyos

Sep 18, 2014

A new GSA Bulletin study uses tree rings to document arroyo evolution along the lower Rio Puerco and Chaco Wash in northern New Mexico, USA. By determining burial dates in tree rings from salt cedar and wi ...

User comments : 8

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

foolspoo
1.7 / 5 (9) Oct 16, 2013
you mean without life, life cant survive?

Plantae is here BECAUSE of the abundance of carbon. Earth will have a very simple time solving this dilemma many believe we are creating. hopefully, there are not too many millions displaced in the coming centuries.
grondilu
2 / 5 (13) Oct 16, 2013
There is a talk from Freeman Dyson called "heretical thoughts about science and society" where he described the problem of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as mostly a problem of land management. Seems that it's not such an heretical thought, after all.

The talk is available on YouTube.
Sanescience
1.3 / 5 (8) Oct 16, 2013
Does anyone know any specific studies using principles behind PV=nRT to calculate the share of elevated temperature measurements at the surface from the increased weight (pressure) of gases released into the atmosphere?
PoppaJ
1.7 / 5 (12) Oct 16, 2013
The study is fundamentally flawed. No plants, no people, no animals, no life no carbon production. Worthless article.
Neinsense99
3.5 / 5 (11) Oct 17, 2013
The study is fundamentally flawed. No plants, no people, no animals, no life no carbon production. Worthless article.

You live in a universe where volcanoes do not exist? Where carbon is not one of the more common elements (after hydrogen and oxygen)? Where the planet Venus does not exist?
VendicarE
3.5 / 5 (8) Oct 17, 2013
Does anyone know any specific studies using principles behind PV=nRT to calculate the share of elevated temperature measurements at the surface from the increased weight (pressure) of gases released into the atmosphere?" - sanescience

The formula isn't applicable because the origin of the extra gas comes from a chemical change that produces gas. Hence the initial temperature of the gas is determined by the energy of the reaction.

Past the initial production the temperature is determined by the gas it is released into, the radiative environment, and it's spectra, none of which are addressed by that gas equation.
Neinsense99
3.7 / 5 (6) Oct 17, 2013
The study is fundamentally flawed. No plants, no people, no animals, no life no carbon production. Worthless article.

You live in a universe where volcanoes do not exist? Where carbon is not one of the more common elements (after hydrogen and oxygen)? Where the planet Venus does not exist?

I meant to type hydrogen and helium, but oxygen, too, is relatively common. Carbon is one of the ten most common elements in the galaxy. http://en.wikiped...Universe
Sanescience
1.5 / 5 (4) Oct 21, 2013
Wow, I guess people don't like questions on science discussions anymore :-P

@VendicarE: Thanks for your attempt at reasoning an answer for how the pressure gradient of the atmosphere is not a factor in ground temperature but I'm looking for published material.