Carbon's role in global warming

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Carbon has been clobbered in the headlines lately for its link to global warming and pollution. But is this much-maligned element—the fourth most abundant in the universe—getting a bum rap?

There's no question that carbon when paired with fellow element oxygen can spell trouble. The combo creates carbon dioxide (CO2), the root of climate change, the most destructive environmental woe facing our planet. But carbon is not inherently evil. In fact, it is a building block of life, present in all living creatures. In our daily lives we often see it in its pure form–think diamonds or lead in pencils. And it is a key ingredient in oil (made from hydrocarbons), certain types of surfboards, and even carbohydrates like bread and pasta, which provide energy for humans and animals. 

So how did carbon get such a bad rep?


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


It's where—and in what quantities—carbon ends up that causes trouble. Over time, our daily activity on Earth has broken the carbon cycle.   When we burn fossil fuels (from the fossils of dead plants and animals) to run our cars, light our homes or make Tupperware, we release CO2 into the atmosphere.  Normally, plants take back that CO2 via photosynthesis (the process by which plants turn sunlight into energy). Carbon dioxide can also be absorbed by the oceans. But as more CO2 is pumped out, more is accumulating in the atmosphere than the plants and oceans can take back. And too much CO2 traps heat, like a blanket covering Earth, causing the globe to warm up.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe