Throughout last year (2023), the climate change chorus grew louder and shriller, calling for ever more drastic measures to curb the emissions of what are termed greenhouse gasses (GHG), which, in the main, is carbon dioxide, with methane now being roped in as a supporting villain.
As of today (January 1), the world’s population stands at around 8.1 billion – a population that is based on carbon chemistry, as is all known life, and requires nutrition in the form of carbon based food.
Few people are advocates of an endless population explosion, although Elon Musk has recently repeated his claim that there are still not enough people in the world – this time supported by Jeff Bezos; both are unelected billionaires who would benefit from an expanding customer base.
This growth in the number of mouths to feed will require a good deal more food to be produced and, ultimately, that food will require the process of photosynthesis, natures method of fixing the sun’s energy into the solid form we call carbohydrates.
Energy rich bonding
The basic key of natures energy management strategy is the energy rich bond between carbon and hydrogen. Plants use solar energy to create that bond and then respiration, mostly by animals, breaks it down, releasing the energy once again to fuel the cells of our bodies.
In essence, the sun provides the energy to split water to release hydrogen, which is then compounded with carbon to produce food. Oxygen just happens to be a by product of this reaction.
Animals take this food and reverse the reaction in a process known as respiration, releasing carbon dioxide and water as they do so, completing several loops, one of which is the carbon cycle.
A major factor limiting photosynthesis, is the availability of carbon in the form of CO2, which is why greenhouse growers add it to the air.
The same applies to the atmosphere as a whole, the more CO2, the quicker crops will grow, and the more they will yield.
What’s more, plants gain greater drought resistance with higher CO2 levels, and NASA satellites have recorded a significant increase in the greening of the planet since they started taking photos in the mid-80s.
The bright side of Carbon
Yet this positive side to CO2 levels is rarely aired, it is submerged by the doom and gloom of climate change lobbyists, and activists who are part of a multi-trillion dollar industry professing to mitigate global warming.
We are therefore left with a growing conflict between the need to feed the world, and the claims of a huge climate change lobby determined to reduce the amount of carbon available to grow the required food.
Nowadays, climate activists are fond to pointing to the increase in CO2 levels over the last century or so, jabbing at graphs of the preceding millennia which show CO2 levels dropping to less than 200ppm at times, a threshold below which plant life struggles to survive.
Plants need for CO2 is amplified in an international study from 2018 where it was found that levels in excess of 1,100ppm were optimal for the growth of three different grass species, including ryegrass.
Farmers dilemma
Agriculture is caught right in the middle of this, on the one hand it is being to told to bury more carbon in the ground, while on the other, it faces the demand to feed a growing population.
Adding to the organic matter content of soils is always a good idea and is an essential part of increasing and maintaining yields with less inputs, so the sequestration of carbon is only to be encouraged, although it is being found that soils differ in how much carbon they can absorb.
Yet, if it is possible to reduce CO2 concentrations by significantly increasing soil organic matter levels, then how much will be left to grow the crops upon?
Over the past year, this question has been asked of several machinery companies who are at the sharp end of designing implements to preserve and increase soil carbon levels, while still preparing the ground for crops.
There is never a direct answer, nor is there from tractor manufacturers, which happily boast of their green credentials while continuing to supply Tier III engines to markets which don’t insist on expensive exhaust treatments.
Carbon as a resource
At some point, this competition for carbon will have to be acknowledged by the zealots who are insisting that economies be turned upside down in pursuit of an unrealisable ideal, and that is to halt climate change.
There are two other inconvenient truths that will also need to be recognised and discussed more openly, the first being that the climate is always changing, and has been ever since photosynthesis evolved 3.5bn years ago.
There are many reasons for this continual development, variation in sun radiation levels and planetary orbits and alignment being the major contenders, yet these are never mentioned in the mad dash to banish oil.
There is also the strong suggestion that we are due the next ice, are we really capable of warding it off through what amounts to a miniscule change in the composition of the earths atmosphere?
This is due, in the main, to a 70% increase in the demand for energy over the same period, it is now up to 178.9 TWh (Terra Watt hours) which, despite all the talk of peak oil, has been met by the increased use of fossil fuels.
A handful of battery powered yard tractors is not going to make the slightest difference to the scale these figures.
Farming, and society in general, has been bamboozled into thinking that carbon is bad stuff when in fact quite the opposite is true. We need it to grow our food and the more the merrier.
As for it warming the planet, then there are plenty of well-respected scientists who take a far less alarmist view but, when faced with a multi-trillion dollar climate mitigation industry, their voices find it difficult to rise above the clamour.