>>27
"You don't need unlimited plant growth to remove a limited amount of carbon from the atmosphere."
This is true of course. But you also added that this would happen in a short period of time. This demands that the sequestriation rate is radically higher than the emission rate, which it at present is very not. So what did you mean, that given enough time (like 500 years) the atmospheric CO2 level will be the same as pre industrialism concentration (1750, around 280 ppm)? The ammount presently in our atmosphere (around 380) will prolly double, even if you consider a positive feedback effect of increased plant growth. Like 60% of the worlds computer power is used to simulate these scenarios, its not like its arbitrarily pulled out of a random ass...