CO2 is Green

{{bronze}}{{DISPLAYTITLE:CO<sub>2</sub> is Green}}{{globalwarmingnav}}
'''CO<sub>2</sub> is Green''', along with its sister organization '''Plants Need CO<sub>2</sub>''', is a [[global warming denialist]] pressure group in the [[United States]] which [[Lobbying|lobbies]] against the classification of [[carbon|carbon dioxide]] as a [[Pollution|pollutant]]. These organizations argue that since carbon dioxide is a vital chemical for [[plant]] life, more of it can only be a good thing, and that any reduction in CO<sub>2</sub> output would be harmful to the ecosystem and the economy.

This is analogous to saying that blood is good for you as it supports your body's critical functions, [[The dose makes the poison|so you should be in favor of having gallons of blood ''forcibly injected into your veins.'']] The idea that we should be pumping CO<sub>2</sub> into the atmosphere is seen as complete and utter [[Bullshit|nonsense]] by anyone with any experience or [[knowledge]] of [[ecology]], atmospheric [[chemistry]], and [[climate change]].

==Background==
Unsurprisingly, the CO<sub>2</sub> is Green and Plants Need CO<sub>2</sub> groups are the creation of the [[fossil fuel]] industry: specifically Leighton Steward, retired vice chairman of Burlington Resources [[oil]] and [[natural gas|gas]] company, and Corbin J Robertson Jr, chief executive of Natural Resource Partners, a [[coal]] resourcing corporation, both based in Houston, [[Texas]].<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/24/AR2009092404797.html?hpid=sec-business New Groups Revive the Debate Over Causes of Climate Change], ''Washington Post'' September 25, 2009.</ref> Plants Need CO<sub>2</sub> is a [[Section 501(c)|501(c)(3)]] non-profit organization, which classifies them as a [[charity]] and makes donations [[tax]]-deductible,<ref>See statements on both organisations' websites, as linked above.</ref><ref>[http://mediamattersaction.org/blog/200909250001 Oil & Coal Interests Launch "CO2 Is Green" Misinformation Campaign], Media Matters</ref> while CO<sub>2</sub> is Green is a 501(c)(4) organization, meaning contributions are not tax-deductible and that the organization is allowed to engage in [[lobbying]] and similar activities.

CO<sub>2</sub> is Green, with its aim of "[[Propaganda|educating]]" the public on the alleged dangers of reduced carbon emissions, has launched newspaper and television [[advertisement]]s in several states.<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2009/sep/28/co2-is-green-tv-advert CO2 is green: the TV advert making viewers choke],''The Guardian'', 28 September 2009.</ref> The TV ads feature a montage of [[Style over substance|aesthetically-chosen]] nature [[Films|film]] footage and a soothing voiceover affirming that "higher CO<sub>2</sub> levels than we have today would help the earth's ecosystems and support more plant and animal life."<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxCQHn-w0Bw CO<sub>2</sub> is Green video]</ref>

The CO<sub>2</sub> website urges readers to write to their [[Senate|Senator]], [[Congress|Congressman]], and the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, protesting against the classification of CO<sub>2</sub> as a pollutant.

==Debunking time==
There are two central claims made by the CO<sub>2</sub> is Green pressure group: firstly, that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, and secondly that more of it will make the world better. Both are very wrong; at best they are [[Lying by omission|simplifications of real science and twisted semantics]]; at worse, they are outright fraudulent claims.

===Not a pollutant===
The adverts claim that "there is no scientific evidence that CO<sub>2</sub> is a pollutant." Of course, there is plenty of [[scientific]] [[evidence]] to show the effects of carbon dioxide on the atmosphere. The definition of a "pollutant", however, is a complicated issue to address, and as we all know, complicated issues are a veritable playground for people with an agenda.

If we define a pollutant as something actively and instantly harmful, carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. If we define it as something that can cause serious [[environmental]] problems and destabilize natural systems when present in elevated concentrations, it certainly ''is'' a pollutant. We suspect that CO<sub>2</sub> is Green are playing around with their definitions when they make this claim. The nature and activity of a pollutant depends on concentration, bioaccumulation, and other factors — even the most harmful substances in the world [[the dose makes the poison|have little or no effect in sufficiently small doses]], while even some of the most benign can be devastating in high doses. The simple facts are that carbon dioxide is known to be a [[greenhouse gas]],<ref>We've known this 1859, starting from the laboratory experiments of John Tyndall. See [http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/climatechanging/climatescienceinfozone/exploringearthsclimate/1point5/1point5point4.aspx here] for a nice summary of the historical development of the topic.</ref> and there's a hell of a lot of it that's out there now that wouldn't be if we hadn't burned millions of years' worth of carbon fixation in the form of fossil fuels.

===More carbon dioxide is good===
[[image:CO2 cooling.png|frame|right|Extract from the [http://www.co2isgreen.net CO<sub>2</sub> is Green website.]<br>That's right folks, the [[sun]] [[Bullshit|is cooling the earth!]] (Quick, use lots more carbon fuels before it's too late!)]]
The second claim — that more CO<sub>2</sub> will benefit the world — has absolutely no backing in [[reality]]. In the case of CO<sub>2</sub>, it's not that the [[molecule]] itself is a dangerous pollutant or actively harmful, but rather that high concentrations of it have a much different effect than low concentrations. CO<sub>2</sub> may be "plant food" in the basic, Sunday school version of how carbon cycles around the [[Earth]], but this emphatically does not mean that more is better. It's true that in a broad sense, more CO<sub>2</sub> will tend to increase plant growth, but it doesn't affect all plants equally. Most worrisome, while crop species like extra CO<sub>2</sub>, it turns out that weeds absolutely ''love'' extra CO<sub>2</sub>. The result is that the tendency for extra CO<sub>2</sub> to increase weed growth can negate the benefits of extra CO<sub>2</sub> for some crops that are deemed as more important,<ref>Ziska, L.H., 2000: [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2000.00364.x/abstract The impact of elevated CO2 on yield loss from a C3 and C4 weed in field-grown soybean.] ''Global Change Biology'' 6, 899-905.</ref> though the weed used in the experiment ({{wpl|Amaranthus retroflexus|common amaranth}}) has been eaten as a vegetable by both [[Native American|Indians]] and [[India]]ns. The real question here is not whether or not those CO<sub>2</sub> emissions would reduce the amount of crops that we eat, but if we would want to eat plants that would grow better under high CO<sub>2</sub>. Keep in mind that if those reality shows about eating strange food have taught people anything, it's that it is extremely difficult to eat something entirely different.

Soil nutrients also tend to be a long-term limiting factor in the growth rates of plants per land area, and any short-term benefit from excess CO<sub>2</sub> is quickly lost as nitrates, phosphates, and other essential nutrients for growth are permanently consumed.<ref>[http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-04/tuom-ssn042015.php Soil nutrients may limit ability of plants to slow climate change]</ref>

Moreover, an increase in atmospheric concentration ''will'' accelerate the greenhouse effect, warming the planet, and plants will hardly be in need of all this extra food if they're all dying because the climate is changing too quickly. Some corollaries:
*Vitamin C is definitely good for you, but eating your own weight in oranges will just cause the body to excrete the excess. In the worst-case scenario you could overdose on the substance and suffer very ill effects as the body can't keep up removing it at a fast enough pace.<ref>According to the [http://www.mayoclinic.org/vitamin-c/expert-answers/faq-20058030 Mayo Clinic], symptoms of excess Vitamin C intake can include diarrhea, vomiting, insomnia, and kidney stones.</ref>
*In a more relevant example, [[mammal]]s ''do'' need a small amount of carbon dioxide in their blood. This can be found in the blood around muscle tissue and, due to the changes in pH by the presence of carbonic acid, displaces [[oxygen]] from hemoglobin. Without the carbon dioxide there, oxygen wouldn't unload out of the blood and into the cells and respiration would not occur — CO<sub>2</sub> ''is'' good for you! In higher concentrations, however, carbon dioxide stays loaded onto hemoglobin and its presence in the blood causes oxygen to be loaded onto hemoglobin less efficiently.
*Everybody needs food, but one of the greatest health problems in modern [[West]]ern societies is consuming [[obesity|too much]] food.
*Also, do you know that you can actually overdose on ''[[water]]''? Classified as dilutional hyponatremia (or "water intoxication"), it was utilized as a form of [[torture]] as early as the [[Middle Ages]].<ref>{{wpa|Water cure (torture)|Water cure}}</ref>

Plants are not the only sink for carbon dioxide. Most of it is permanently stored by being dissolved in the [[ocean]]s. As the oceans warm up, the solubility of gases goes down (this is the reverse situation of the solubility of solids – think of the explosive fizzing when you open a warm bottle of a soft drink). Thus, as the oceans warm they can't absorb as much CO<sub>2</sub> — so there'll be more of it in the atmosphere. More CO<sub>2</sub> in the atmosphere leads to more warming, and the cycle continues in a positive [[Effects of global warming#Tipping points/feedback loops|feedback loop]].

===Colour===
Of course, the main problem is that carbon dioxide is transparent. Like the CO<sub>2</sub> is Green agenda, one might say.

When ionised, it glows a nice blue-white or pink colour, which is almost the complete opposite of green.<ref>[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/Carbon_Dioxide_Laser_At_The_Laser_Effects_Test_Facility.jpg Pretty.]</ref>

==See also==
*[[Ron Johnson]] - A U.S. Senator who has pushed this line of "thought."
*[[Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change]], who love CO<sub>2</sub> just as much
*[[Global warming conspiracy theory]]

==External links==
*[http://co2isgreen.net/ CO<sub>2</sub> is Green]
*[http://plantsneedco2.org/ Plants Need CO<sub>2</sub>]
*[http://www.co2science.org/ Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change]
*[http://skepticalscience.com/co2-plant-food.htm CO<sub>2</sub> is plant food], Skeptical Science
*[http://climatecrocks.com/2010/08/16/the-co2-is-plant-food-crock/ The CO<sub>2</sub> is plant food crock], Climate Denial Crock of the Week

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Pseudoscience promoters]]
[[Category:Denialist organizations]]
[[Category:Propaganda]]
[[Category:Global warming denialists]]

Categories: Pseudoscience promoters, Denialist organizations, Propaganda, Global warming denialists