/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12068380
>would more CO2 in the air not allow for larger growth as long as the sun kept shining?
Generally yes in controlled conditions, but when you have shifts in rainfall, temperature and general local conditions as a result of climate change then the ecosystem dies.

>Hasn't all of that sequestered carbon been residing in the Earth's crust for millions of years?
No. The terrestrial biosphere as in the trees, soil and wetlands does not sequester carbon for a long time. You're thinking about rocks like carbonate which are marine. With things like coal, only a small percentage of the carbon is sequestered into coal which forms in very specific conditions.

>As long as the plant doesn't burn, the carbon just sits there locked up in biochemicals, right?
No, see above.

>And if the CO2 doesn't dissolve in the ocean as rapidly, doesn't the land just pick up the slack?
No. It would be evident if it did. Moreso peatlands and permafrost that hold carbon longer in the surface have started releasing that carbon.

The problem of ocean uptake is a really bad, because the as the carbonate ion concentrations drop with ocean acidification the organisms that build carbonate shells to sequester CO2 are greatly affected.