LYTLE: Net Zero has arrived, Canadian forests have done it for us!

The 'Science is settled!' Except, of course, by definition, it never is. And when there is money to be made, 'Science' is remarkably flexible and unsettled. I have a friend who bought a bunch of land in Peru’s selva or jungle and “rents” it out for carbon offset credits to whoever will pay him. His investment returns to him a reasonable income stream. It turns out that the green stuff we call plants absorbs quite a bit of carbon dioxide. More than we thought.For the past couple of years, the peer-reviewed literature has become crowded with articles about the unexpected efficiency of photosynthesis. This was expected to reverse desertification and add to the greening of the Earth. And indeed it has. Our blue planet has an increasingly green hue to it. The surprise is that as carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere increase, the quantity and efficiency of plant capture also increases. It is a self-correcting cycle for those who believe that increasing carbon dioxide needs correcting.Here is where this gets more interesting. It also turns out that increasing carbon dioxide leads to more efficient use of water in the plant system. Some plants are estimated to be up to 46% more efficient in how they use water, with a mere 15% increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide. This is hardly an intuitive conclusion, suggesting the science is not so settled. One might expect plants to make more efficient use of water as carbon levels decrease and the plant becomes starved for the photosynthesis drivers. Yet it is quite the opposite. Do the climate models incorporate this new information?The obvious hypothesis to this new scientific information is that perhaps plants are larger sinks for carbon dioxide than assumed in the climate models. And indeed, that is the case if we are to believe Sally Younger and her team working at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Using satellite data and imagery, researchers have estimated, country by country, how much carbon dioxide is emitted and how much is absorbed. The study indicates that Canada produces 620 million tonnes of carbon dioxide each year through cement and fossil fuel production. For this heinous sin, we pay a carbon tax designed to prevent our polluting ways. But it turns out that the vast boreal forest of Canada, being much more efficient in removing carbon dioxide than anticipated, absorb 1,580 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year. This means that we are one of the earth’s atmospheric scrubbers. We are taking approximately one billion tonnes of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere each year just by being us. It might surprise you to know that this has been generally known since before the year 2000 as Peter Huber noted in his book “Hard Green; Saving the Environment from the Environmentalists.”. He reported that atmospheric measurements of carbon dioxide on the west coast of Canada were higher than similar measurements on the east coast.China, by the way, produces 7,860 million more tonnes of carbon dioxide per year than they absorb. Why do we have to launder China’s atmospheric carbon dioxide as well as its money? Is it too Trumpian to suggest that China owes us big time?Of course, there are other sources of carbon dioxide besides fossil fuels and cement plants. An average forest fire season in Canada, according to my AI helper, produces about 500 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year which leaves us with 500 million more tonnes scrubbed than produced. It turns out we are heroes. We have achieved Net Zero! Isn’t that why we exist as a post-national country? To show the world how to achieve Net Zero while being not-Americans? We have done it! We don’t need to have a carbon tax anymore because we have done it!I wonder if Mr. Trudeau knows this. Or Mr. Carney. Or Mr. Poilievre?

LYTLE: Net Zero has arrived, Canadian forests have done it for us!

Related Stories