The CO2 fertilization effect has been the dominant driver of the global-scale increase in “leaf area index” (LAI), or greening, since the 1980s. Scientists have estimated that CO2’s photosynthesis-enhancing capacity is 70% responsible for the greening trend (Zhu et al., 2016).
Using Advanced Very High-Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) data sources of questionable quality, some recent studies have suggested the greening trend has slowed or has even been reversed to browning since the 21st century began. [emphasis, links added]
As suggested, these data sources “should be used in caution” (Chen et al., 2024) as it is “well known that AVHRR-based NDVI and LAI have multiple sources of uncertainty,” such as “obvious artificial signals from the orbital drift.”
Using much more reliable MODIS data, scientists (Chen et al., 2024) can now say the LAI [greening] trend in the 21st century is robustly positive, and that 2001-2020 “global greening is an indisputable fact.”
The satellite data indicate that 55.15% of global areas are greening “at an accelerated rate,” whereas just 7.28% have undergone a browning trend since 2001.
CO2 fertilization is still the dominant driver (75.63%) of Earth’s 21st-century greening trend.
Any drought trends in recent decades cannot overtake the positive CO2 fertilization effect, as all drought does is slightly slow the acceleration of the CO2-induced greening trend.
Read more at No Tricks Zone
Increasing CO2 is both a source of greening on planet earth but also reduces water consumption by the plants since they get the CO2 needed more quickly and thus lose less H2O.
One person commenting on this web site insisted that the greening of the earth was not due to increased carbon dioxide, but increased rain fall due a warmer planet. The wonderful thing about science is we can get to the truth when studies looking at different parameters come to the same conclusion. One study grew four different trees. They where the same species grown under identical conditions of light, soil, temperature, and moisture. The only difference was the carbon dioxide concentration. There was a direct and dramatic correlation with the lowest carbon dioxide concentration producing the least grow and the highest the most growth. Carbon dioxide is not only a plant fertilizer, the concentration of 420 ppm in our atmosphere is suboptimum. That is why many green house operators use concentrations of 1600 to 1800.
Nicely said! That the climate zealots will purposefully ignore facts such as this is further evidence of their blinkered view of reality. Sad.
Those who claim CO2 is a Pollutant has sawdust for Brains
Banning or Regulating CO2 over t his whole Climate Change fiasco would be big a mistake far worse then any fake Climate Change disaster
CO2 is the friendliest gas of all as it is non toxic, edible as in carbonated drinks, heaviest gas of all so higher % will be in the lower atmosphere and nothing to do with blanketing the Earths surface causing warming, that is why it ‘feeds’ the vegetation. Interestingly 1 ha of grain crops absorb more CO2 than 1ha of old growth forest ( ex CSIRO info) So why all this hysteria about CO2 destroying our planet. Wake up all you humans !