Half truths on the CO2

In this that SuperSantiEgo comes and does to me to come this video (cortito):

Carbon dioxide: the vital breath

For that you should not be tanned in English, basically this gentleman says, this way of grandiloquent form, that he felt like putting many aquariums with plants inside and that he wanted to prove what was happening when "insuflaba" different concentrations of CO2. I say well that thing about insuflar because literally he affirms that for 19 months every night it was filling to different blasts number of syringes with the exhaled air of his lungs to the aquariums, obtaining this way in them ambience with different concentrations of CO2. Since you see everything it stays as very "divinely". After this time he verified that there was a very clear interrelation between the aquariums with air enriched in CO2 and those where the plants had grown more. This most skillful observation serves to him to conclude that in fact the carbon dioxide is “the gas of the life”, that it favors the biomass production and that therefore all the affirmations of which it is a question of a product be contaminated there are attempts of confusing and of manipulating.

I do not know if you will be surprised that he says to you that I agree absolutely with this gentleman essentially everything what he says it is true, now well, the problem comes when there tries to slip in this information falsely presented like novel discoveries, like arguments opposite to the need to avoid the global warming.

So, we go on parts:

The first perversion has to do with the experiment in itself. Since you know, the green plants absorb dioxide of atmospheric carbon and turn it into organic matter with help of the solar light thanks to a process called photosynthesis and that takes as residual products molecules of oxygen, highly pollutant (for according to whom). The extract of the process is that, in fact, the carbon that is part of the textiles of the vegetable and that then, according to the chains tróficas, is going on to all the animals of the ecosystem, comes precisely from the dioxide of carbon absorbed in the photosynthesis. Not in vain there is called he to this process a fixation of the carbon, and it is led by one of the most important enzymes of the biosphere: the ribulosa 1-5 difosfato carboxilasa-oxidasa (RuBisCo, for the friends).

Know, friends of the blogoplancton, that the life on this planet as we know it today present enzyme depends in the most important portion on this one in all the plants with photosynthesis oxigénica and that, as unequivocal demonstration of the intelligent design, turns out to be tremendously inefficient, is motivated by me for which it is necessary to produce in big quantities, and in fact it is believed that it is the most abundant enzyme of the biosphere.

Any that one who knows something about chemistry can be corroborated by him, one of the forms of accelerating the speed of a reaction is to increase the concentration of the reagents, especially if there constitute a factor limitante. Understanding that the carbon dioxide is in the ambience much diluted (0.04 %) is obvious that an increase in the concentration of the same one obviously will increase the fixation of the carbon and therefore the biomass production.

This phenomenon, for example, is known in abundance between the acuaristas, who inject carbon dioxide into the water so that the plants grow more, and I can say for proper experience that the difference is abysmal: when I add this gas to my aquarium I have to prune the plants every week, thing that does not happen when the bottle has remained empty.

Basically it gives a little of foreign shame (and of laugh) that this gentleman gives him so much importance to an experiment that can be done in a course of biology of baccalaureate and bandages it like a top investigation, but you already know that Internet is what it has. Already put, his video could be much better if instead of gait fooling about and giving blasts to syringes a few bottles of CO2 had been bought in the animals shop of next to his house: the experiment would have been much more rigorous and would not have hyperventilated so much. Also, the concentration of CO2 in the exhaled air can be very variable and it is not, not much less, a gas in high concentration.

The second perversion is that it tries to use of this supposed discovery of his to affirm that the global warming is a lie because the CO2 is not pollutant.

Really the CO2 is not pollutant, it is more, it is a fundamental gas for the functioning of the biosphere, and the greenhouse effect that it produces is the same way necessary for the balance of the ecosystems. Without him the Earth would be a frozen planet, as it it was also in some moments of the past. The CO2 is necessary, the problem comes when even small changes in his concentration increase the greenhouse effect up to the point of altering the climate that we have experiencing.

Intrinsically it is not that this is good or bad, but if the models are in the certain thing and an increase of scarcely a few grades of temperature on a global scale they provoke that there melt the polar ice fields, which found the reservations of fresh water of the mountains, which there alters the fenología of plants and animals (including those who feed the population), that desertifiquen inhabited areas, which extend illnesses and a length etc., it is not very difficult to conclude that in proper egoism it is interesting to us to try to preserve a balance with the environment.

That thing about the greenhouse effect. Yes, already I know that you all know it to yourselves.

It is very possible that with the habitual distortion of the information that realize the massive mass media, the people have ended up by thinking that the carbon dioxide is some type of pollutant. This is flatly false, and to perpetuate this idea only serves to favor distortions as that of the video of the beginning of the entry. Neither it is true that the greenhouse effect is slightly negative, much on the contrary, it is necessary, and if it turns out to be dangerous for the humanity and the current biodiversity is for an excess question, but not because it is the result of an air pollution.

With complete certainty, the increase of the atmospheric concentration of CO2 is provoking an increase in the process of fixation of the carbon, and therefore, the biomass production is major than in times immediately previous to the increase antropogénico of this gas in the ambience. Nevertheless, the process of fixation of the carbon has never been the worry motive, but the undesirable effects in the climate that has an increase of the greenhouse effect.

So I hope we all do an effort to be well informed, because it is precisely when the concepts have no skylights the ideal moment in which they strain a video of the yutú to you with plants in aquariums and deifying music and do the prick to you a foul-up.