Plants may be able to limit the impact of our CO2 emissions even more than we previously thought, an innovative new experiment suggests.
The study is the first to try to create a simplified self-contained
replica of the Earth's land-based carbon cycle, using soil and plants in
airtight containers. As researchers increased temperature and CO2 levels, the plants kept absorbing the extra gas for longer than computer models and earlier experiments had predicted.
In fact, they took in 62 per cent of the extra CO2
and prevented the temperature from increasing by more than 2.3°C. At
that point the gas's concentration was still beneath 500 parts per
million (ppm). Without the plants' increased activity, it would have
been 760ppm, implying warming of around 4.4°C.
It's hardly a
solution to climate change; plants couldn't keep this up for ever, and
the experiments did not include the changes in the availability of water
and nutrients that will be another consequence of climate change and
that will almost certainly limit plant growth in many areas. But the
study does suggest that plants may be more capable of adapting to
changing conditions than we thought, and it will give us a more accurate
idea of the consequences of climate change.
'The scenarios we used were very optimistic in terms of future CO2
anthropogenic emissions, so there are still very serious concerns about
climate change,' says Dr Alex Milcu of Imperial College, London, the
paper's lead author. 'But it does look like plants may be able to take
in more CO2 than previous experiments and models predicted.'
At the moment, scientists estimate that terrestrial plants mop up around a quarter of the CO2 we emit. Increasing CO2
levels means they can grow faster and absorb even more of the gas. But
the higher temperatures predicted from climate change will also make the
microbes in the soil more active, increasing their respiration and
hence their CO2 emissions.
So we don't know what the overall effect will be - will more land ecosystems absorb more CO2
on balance, or less? Understanding this would let us make better
predictions of the effect releasing different amounts of carbon into the
air would have.
Previous studies have tried to answer the
question either using computer models or by putting plants in an
experimental setup and changing just one variable at a time - for
instance, raising CO2 and seeing how they react.
But
this approach doesn't do justice to the complexity of the carbon cycle,
which is full of hidden tipping points and feedback loops. When the
environment changes and affects how plants grow, their response changes
the environment again, in turn affecting their growth, and so on. The
researchers behind this study decided to try to model this complexity by
building a closed, airtight system that worked as a simplified version
of the whole terrestrial carbon cycle.
'Computer climate models
have become increasingly complex and I wanted to go back to basics. We
achieved this by somewhat radically building a 'physical' model of the
terrestrial carbon cycle. This is equivalent to using a wind tunnel, as
opposed to a computer simulation, to test the aerodynamics of a new
structure,' says co-author Professor Phil Ineson, from the University of
York. 'Our experimental findings made total sense but suggested that
the capacity of the Earth to buffer against rising carbon dioxide may be
greater than the computer models imply - we still have the same major
concerns about climate change, but the Earth system may have some tricks
up her sleeve!'
They put plants growing in microbe-rich soil into
sealed plastic cabinets and varied the conditions they grew under,
monitoring what happened under different scenarios for three months.
Some were kept in unchanged conditions; others got more CO2 but unchanged temperatures. A third group got more CO2 and temperatures that changed according to a climate model's predictions of the effects of its CO2 levels - so the higher CO2 levels climbed, the hotter it got.
They
found that the plants in the final category didn't just absorb the
extra carbon released by the soil microbes; they also took in much of
the extra CO2 that had been added to their cabinets' atmosphere, limiting temperature increase. But the plants didn't bring CO2 levels or temperatures back down again; conditions never returned to how they'd started throughout the life of the experiment.
Milcu
says the team would have liked to have carried on for longer, but that
the experiment was so difficult to set up that by the time they sealed
every leak and got a truly closed system working, they had just three
months left.
They have done limited trials of a more sophisticated
follow-up experiment whose cabinets also included an aquatic component,
as the oceans are at least as important as plants on land in absorbing
CO2 from the atmosphere. But these weren't conclusive, and
Milcu would like to carry out much more extensive and longer-lasting
trials using this improved setup. He'd also like to use much more
diverse plant communities, rather than just one kind of plant as here,
to give a better idea of the overall response of whole ecosystems.
No comments:
Post a Comment