Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

(post is archived)

[–] • 1 pt

I always wondered about that. Plants that have photosynthesis as their main energy source give off carbon dioxide when not absorbing sunlight and giving off oxygen. At least, that's what I remember from basic biology. I could be totally wrong - but if not, why are they going to tax and charge money for a naturally occurring.. oh.,.. oh yeah.

[–] • 1 pt

It's a beautiful cycle.

Plants produce stored accessible energy from water+co2+sunlight. Carbohydrates aka sugar. O2 is also produced.

Animals consume the energy which gives off c02 and the cycle continues

Without plants all o2 becomes bound up. An reducing atmosphere because o2 is so reactive.

But you have to also know that sugar isn't just energy for plants but also their structure. Roots trunks leaves bark. It's all made up of sugar created by photosynthesis.

Which means plants bind up c02 unless plants get eaten.

And if too much co2 gets bound up life on earth dies

A beautiful cycle.

[–] • 0 pt

We are all made of carbon, which is essential for all forms of life. Carbon dioxide in the air makes plants grow, and increases food crop yields by significant amounts. We do have more carbon in the air today than in the recent past, and the effect of this has been wholly positive and good. We need more CO2 in the air, not less.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

We have the least amount of CO2 in Earth's history today. CO2 also has nothing to do with temperature.

[–] • 0 pt

Is this a meme format that I've never seen before, or is this new?

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

So they want to negatively charge carbon? What that gunna du? Do you realize how much energy you have to waste to make negatively charged monoatomic carbon? Ludicrous I sez. Better off smoking baking soda.