Global Greening From Higher CO2 Hits “Striking” New Heights – but the Mainstream Media Won’t Tell You About It
Significant new evidence has emerged of widespread and significant increases in plant vegetation across the Earth due to the recent rise of the trace gas carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Using what they describe as True Significant Trends – a workflow programme integrating sophisticated spatial and time-period data – a geographer and an agrobiologist in Spain found “robust quantitative evidence” of widespread global greening, describing it as “striking” – “with a significant portion of Earth’s terrestrial land surface showing measurable increases in vegetation cover over the last four decades”.
This is the CO2 story that dare not print its tale in the mainstream media. Recent dramatic world vegetation boosts are easily tracked by satellite, and estimates of growth range around 14-20% over just 40 years. Recent scientific work has found the rate of greening has actually been increasing since the turn of the century. Ask Grok for recent coverage of this important trend in the BBC and Guardian, and the answer comes back with none since 2016. Global greening heads a long list of taboo subjects for captured journalists promoting the political Net Zero fantasy. Also on the not-to-do list is the pause of the Arctic sea ice extent since 2007, the continued strength of the Gulf Stream, record growth for three years of coral on the Great Barrier Reef and North American wildfires in the last 100 years running at barely a quarter of those recorded back to 1600.
Global greening helps reduce world famine and reclaim desert areas but it is not of the slightest interest in the mainstream since it disrupts the fake claims of a climate in crisis due to humans burning hydrocarbons. It is easier to stick with the witch doctor attribution pronouncements of extreme weather and all the dodgy temperature data pumped out at unnaturally heat-ravaged measuring sites. To consider all the data that show extreme events are not getting worse, with or without human involvement, risks the punters concluding that a little extra warmth and CO2 in the atmosphere is probably a good thing. Perish the thought that the climate is currently in a rather pleasant and benign phase of Earth’s existence. If that is the uplifting take, cue, of course, the end of Net Zero and that would never do. Net Zero relies on fake science and much of the real stuff is fatal to the collectivist ambitions of its hard-Left promoters.
The Spanish researchers do not quantify the amount of new vegetation but conclude that 38% of the world’s land surface shows significant vegetation change. It was found that 76% of the change total showed more greening and, interestingly, those areas with more plant life showed higher rates of additional growth. The results help confirm global greening, with the researchers hoping their work incorporating addition relevant data will provide a clearer picture of what is going on. (Just don’t tell the mainstream press!)
These striking growth trends are replicated in recent scientific work. They should not be a surprise since plants on Earth have evolved to thrive in levels of atmospheric CO2 much higher than the current historically-sparse totals around 400 parts per million (ppm). Far from being a politicised ‘pollutant’, CO2 is rightly known as the gas of life. A group of American scientists recently highlighted 2020 as an “historic landmark” since it registered as the greenest year in the satellite record from 2001 to 2020.
Debate over the percentage of total global land greening and ‘browning’ is ongoing. The Spanish team suggests 38% greening but other work finds a greening change over at least 50% of the surface. A group of Chinese scientists noted there has been an “accelerated rate” of recent vegetation growth. Drought supposedly caused by climate change is a favourite fearmongering tactic with activists but the Chinese scientists also found that any water scarcity trend only slowed global greening and “was far from triggering browning”.
In fact some of the deserts across the world are reducing in size, particularly around areas prone to subsistence living. The map below shows recent greening south of the Sahara and in other famine-prone areas in eastern Africa. Considerable greening across Eurasia has also been found by many scientific teams.

Everywhere you look these days, the mainstream media are making themselves look stupid by putting a blind faith in the unworkable Net Zero agenda and turning a Nelsonian eye to the actual science around climate, including the benefits of CO2. The authors of a recent science paper, Charles Taylor and Wolfram Schlenker, recently found what they called a consistently large fertilisation effect of a 1 ppm increase in CO2, equating to a 0.4%, 0.6% and 1% higher yield for corn, soybean and wheat respectively. You don’t need Grok to tell you that the BBC and the Guardian are uninterested in reporting on the astonishing improvements in crop yields caused by extra enriching atmospheric CO2.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
It’s funny how the net-zero nutters are mad about the planet but don’t care about the plants. They’d rather cover fields with solar panels than use them to grow crops. (Aren’t fast-growing plants supposed to absorb carbon dioxide?) Nature has a way of balancing itself out, but these zealots see themselves as more powerful than nature, and when they come unstuck they’ll take the rest of us with them.
You have a point there, if it’s cute and furry and has big doe brown eyes it must be protected but if it’s just a plant it’s fair game! plants are alive too! so to all you superior veggies and vegans out there don’t forget there’s only one important food item for our survival that has never been alive, salt!
Everything they touch is an environmental disaster; EV 500kg toxic high fire risk batteries, solar panels almost impossible to recycle, burying millions of tons of carbon fibre wind turbine blades, mincing anything that flies, distressing the whales.
They really don’t give a damn about nature and the environment, only money and control.
According to a recent NASA paper, an area the size of continental USA has greened around deserts, shrinking them.
Natural global greening exposes the posturing of self-serving idiots planting plenary indulgence trees to offset their jet travel, etc.
The increase in vegetation has a parallel, positive consequence, increased habitat for a variety of fauna. Supposedly the Eco-fakists are “all systems go” when it comes to “wilding”, increasing habitats, encouraging biodiversity, developing ecosystems but apparently only when they do it to farmland.
If we could – and we cannot – reduce C02 concentrations back down to 260ppm which is the target, all that new flora and fauna and a great deal more would be eradicated. How does that square with “environmentalism” and “conservation”? Hypocrites.
Pass the humbugs mother.
And The Exposé reported yesterday that, according to a 2017 BBC documentary, elephants roamed East Anglia 400,000 years ago, meaning that temperatures must have been at least 10°C higher then: https://expose-news.com/2025/06/05/elephants-once-roamed-britains-savannas/.
So much for oceans boiling and other disasters should global temperatures rise by a paltry 1.5°C.
Pre-industrial revolution, CO2 levels were at dangerously low levels. If anything mankind’s burning of fossil fuels increasing CO2 levels is a good thing, especially for plants.
It is the increase of temperature that has caused the Oceans to warm and release more sequestered CO2, that is where most of the increase has come from!
We should be calling the Climate zealots plant haters, they love calling us names.
If you really think elevated levels of CO2 is a problem, plant some trees or plants – don’t clear forests to build
renewableunreliable energy sources.Once the Climate loonies figure out how to link global greening to Net Zero and how it must be a very bad thing because “Science”, they will update the mainstream media software.
Then they’ll all start preaching about how much worse things are getting and we must all abandon everything invented after the year dot, or else. Trust the science™.
But do they put blind faith in the Net Zero agenda or do they just seize the easiest way to find the next eye catching headline?
It’s important to realise that there will be few headlines about there being no climate crisis; it doesn’t sell advertising. Even reporting on activists losing court cases is thin gruel.
What can generate headlines is Government disarray over Net Zero, i.e. politics, and some sufficiently lurid descriptions of how ordinary life will be adversely affected by it. I believe there are some indications of this happening, helped along by the increasingly shrill claims of ‘the sky is falling’.
All true, but it’s largely masked by other noticeable factors for most of us. E.g. we’ve just had a higher than average sunshine hours spring, after a benign winter, to which some crops have responded to quite obviously, notwithstanding the shortage of rainfall. My allotment grown broad beans are about 3 weeks early this year, and some of my blackcurrants look like being ready to harvest late next week. Anything with deep roots that can grab the water seem to do well. There have even been stories about strawberry growers recently.
Something else that I remembered later on is that many firms that use heated greenhouses deliberately jack up the levels, by dint of the exhaust from gas fired heating. Might as well acquire a bonus that way rather than expelling the exhaust – as long as it is mostly CO2 & water (to moisten the air).
There is a Rick Stein programme in which he interviews James Dyson in one of his greenhouses which is growing tomatoes. Dyson tells Rick that waste CO2 from compost is pumped in to the greenhouse in order to produce quicker and bigger crops. I’m surprised it hasn’t been edited out.
Get ready for the push back. I’ve already had it: “..studies have show plants need less nutrients in CO2 rick environments so people get less good food.. blah, blah.. derp derp derpity derp..”
Exactly just let everyone grow ganja and we can regreen the world.
I remember being taught in ‘O’ level geography in 1972,
that to increase CO₂.levels in glasshouse crop production in the Netherlands, fossil fuels are burned.
Clearly a bit more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere should be a target to strive for, for any responsible government.
https://www.greenhouse-management.com/greenhouse_management/carbon_dioxide_greenhouses/sources_carbon_dioxide_greenhouses.htm
With regard to main stream media lies it is important to see that periodically they are well and truly exposed for all to see. When Joe Biden first became president of the USA it immediately hit me that this man should be looked after in a care home rather than being president of the USA. Anyone at all familiar with human degeneration would recognise it (ie 90% of us)
Despite this being the biggest story around it was ignored by nearly all of the MSM and anyone questioning their position was aggressively attacked.
Now it is all out. When Biden tried to stand again it could not be hidden, another empty head had to be found to front the Democratic party. The details of the cover up are public, although the MSM don’t admit much or apologise.
So it is and will be with net zero.
It isn’t just the Climate that the MSM reporting distorts. We’ve endured all the nonsense of Covid-19, Mrna and the dental of side-effects. Opinion has taken over in importance from truth in reporting, as it has in politics and science and the Law
Marvellous news, disaster for the eco wet wipes.
So does tree ring data tell us that the world was warmer when CO2 was high or does it simply tell us that trees grow faster when CO2 levels are higher?
Begs question as to whether tree ring data is also nonsense. Assuming wide rings mean warmer temperatures when CO2 levels are higher could just be the direct impact of CO2 rather than warmer temperatures?