Skip to main content

Greenhouse Planet - Lewis Ziska ***

The message of this book is interesting, and one I've rarely seen discussed - I would definitely have given it more than three stars if it wasn't for the extremely irritating writing style (more on that later). What Lewis Ziska does is to bring to the forefront an aspect of climate change that pretty much goes under the radar: its impact on plant growth.

Mostly leaving aside the impacts of drought, wildfires and flash flooding, Ziska homes in on the implications that increased carbon dioxide levels have on plant biology. We all know that plants use the carbon dioxide in the air to get the carbon needed for growth - and that increased CO2 levels can have an effect on that growth. But what's startling is both the lack of research into what the impact of higher carbon dioxide levels are - and the range of effects it is likely to generate (mostly negative).

Perhaps the most frequent comment of the good scientist is 'It's more complicated than we thought,' - and that's certainly the case here. Some have pointed to the positive benefits for agriculture of having more CO2 in the atmosphere. And up to a point those benefits exist. However, Ziska makes clear that it would be extremely over-simplistic to think that this is a universal benefit. Arguably, the two most significant findings here are that not all species of the same crop react the same way to increased carbon dioxide levels, and that weeds, on the whole, get more benefit than crop plants - so the impact of higher CO2 on a field of, say, rice or wheat, can be to reduce the crop yield because there is so much more competition from weeds.

An important point that Ziska makes is the relative lack of research into this, in part because it falls between two stools. The agricultural funders point to the climate people, who then refer you back to the agricultural sources. It is particularly strange, as Ziska says, that there has been hardly any research into finding which strains of crop plants benefit most from having more carbon dioxide available, so that appropriate choices can be made. Hopefully the book will help turn this round.

So far, so good. But there are some issues with the writing. Ziska uses an extremely heavy-handed folksy style with far too many rhetorical questions along the lines of 'Rice is often a staple food for the poorest people - and they will be the ones most impacted. Yeah, but those of us who don't eat a lot of rice won't be affected, right? Wrong...' The single (quite small) page with that one in contains two other rhetorical questions and a passing 'Hmm'.

This is also a very US-centric book for a worldwide problem. Although Ziska does refer to other countries (as in those rice-heavy locations), the examples are very much driven by America's distinctive approach to farming (and its plant life such as poison ivy). And then there's a near-obsession with one phrase that I've never heard used by climate change deniers: 'CO2 is plant food'. The entire book pivots on countering the use of this phrase to suggest that climate change is just fine. 

I accept some have said this, but certainly in Europe it's not something that you often come across. Even if people do make this argument, it's hard to see how it somehow would counter the impact of sea level rise, droughts, wildfires, flash floods, mass migration and more. It might be catchphrase with a certain kind of American conservative, but it's not got any traction in the world at large. All it does in this book is get in the way of the important stuff.

What we have here is by no means all bad, then - and highly recommended if you want to learn more about the impact of CO2  on plant growth, and the implications of yet another impact of climate change. But it could have been better.

Hardback:   
Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly digest for free here
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more