Rumata
Wow, what a discovery, and what a suprise. Crops were selected and bred exactly for their carbohydrates. So if climate is better for them, they produce more carbohydrate.
"Every leaf and every grass blade on earth makes more and more sugars as CO2 levels keep rising," Loladze recently said. So, by global warming, we will get more proteins from cows.
Don't be a "half empty" guy.
Si77
The article fails to mention that increasing co2 increases total food production by 13% so more food is produced with less land. Starving people arent too concerned about zinc deficiency and anyway zinc is a very cheap supplement. Daft bias science. The climate change proponents seem hell bent on denying that there any benefits from more co2. There are aleays two sides to a coin.
LordInsidious
We have a lot of food already but not a lot of nutrition in the food and this will make things worse. Claiming this can be positive ' is like doing chemotherapy because you’re tired of shaving your head' (R. Williams)
flyerfly
The real problem with food these days is GMO's, herbacides, pesticides and hormones getting into them. Most people don't seem to care/notice these things and they are a REAL problem. CO2 and climate are a non-issue compared to this. Once there is to much GMO there will be no going back because it will spoil everything.
Wolf0579
I read a recent study (don't recall where) that was able to correlate decreasing vitamin content of food and decreasing mineral content in soil to increases in nitrogen fertilizer application in agriculture.
Catweazle
"As a civilization we are now living with 400 ppm for the first time: it's a new world."
No, not really. We have had periods on the past when CO2 was several times as high, with no ill-effects on the ecosystem whatsoever.
We inhabit the Earth from the polar regions to the Equator, with all the diverse conditions that such a variation implies, is anyone really trying to make out we can't overcome minor details like a slight change in the nutritional value of food?
Douglas Bennett Rogers
This whole theory hangs on CO2 leveraging H2O. Around 95 % of the greenhouse effect is due to H2O. The H2O can be snow, clouds, gas, or bodies of water. The result of increased H2O is highly nonlinear and much harder to model than CO2.
jd_dunerider
Farming methods have a much more significant impact on nutrients in food. Soils are depleted, and the way they supplement them is doing us no favors.
andyholdren
"So maybe we will just grow more food to compensate?" Rich, will we have to eat more too?
Politico writes that Loladze analyzed 15,000 observations. Rich you write nearly 8,000. You have to collect two samples, no? From regular air plot and increased CO2 plot. 8,000 times 2 is 16,000. Is this the reason, Rich for different numbers?
Roland Riese
In Holland's glasshouses is the CO2 level raised in some cases to 1000ppm to grow food for the past 40 years.