41–50 of 141 posts
Why should it ever have been a carbon sink? I thought forests were neutral as they release carbon when old growth decomposes?
The big deal with forests is they keep a large amount of carbon out of the atmosphere on a rotating basis. We really need that right now.
* Consumers eating JBS beef and consumers buying exotic wood and consumers buying gold from illegal mining have flipped the Amazon Forest from Carbon Sink to Source. This collective blamming becomes tiring when the actions are self-contained in a small group of people.
I could be wrong, but I belief that the issue is bigger than that. If you live in the US and drive a car or eat meat, you are likely to be co-responsible. Soy culture is used to create a cheap protein feedstock for the meat industry. Modern car fuel contains ethanol (10% in the EU). The ethanol is produced by having micro organisms convert biomass. The idea being that you use the short carbon cycle (already in the ec…
It‘s a maximum of 10%, but you almost never actually get that much. E5 fuel contains 0-5% ethanol, E10 contains 5-10%.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Contract killers are responding to demand, but we don't let them legally practice their trade.
So people who hire contract killers are not to blame? I don't understand this argument - saying "it's not our fault the cattle/hardwood logging/mining companies cut down the Amazon" is nonsense, that's been widely known about for decades and we (collectively) just bought more and more of this stuff. It's their fault and ours.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're assuming that trees can always grow faster than humans can destroy them. That may be true for 8 billion humans at current living standards but if the population grows or the living standards improve humans will figure out a way to destroy those trees very quickly.
Even NASA concedes that the last 20 years has seen the planet become greener. Humans planting trees for reforestation have almost nothing to do with that trend. People are trying to claim credit for things they have nothing to do with. The surface area of the earth is absolutely massive. Humans likely occupy less than 2% of it. Even if all humanity was mobilozed to planting trees 24/7 with the most advanced machines…
Are you sure, from nasa.gov itself:
> which is thought to be due to intensive agriculture to feed growing populations and ambitious tree-planting programs
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/greening-of-the-earth-mitigates...
> Birds do more for nature using only their assholes than humanity could do with their entire beings..
And what do humans do to birds ?
> Human activity is the greatest cause of bird extinction around the world. The top human causes of bird extinction involve: the increased human population, destruction of habitat (through development for habitation, logging, animal and single-crop agriculture, and invasive plants), ...
I spent the last 10 days in a hut on the edge of the Amazon and am in a hotel in Lima, waiting for my flight out of Peru. Seeing this story, I thought I'd add one brief first hand account. The jungle was noticeably cut down since I had last been there 7 months ago. What had been just a hiking trail to our camp had been widened to the size of a road by all the tree clearing. The trees are pretty thin and not the best…
Without the rule of law, you only own what you can defend yourself.
I spent the last 10 days in a hut on the edge of the Amazon and am in a hotel in Lima, waiting for my flight out of Peru. Seeing this story, I thought I'd add one brief first hand account. The jungle was noticeably cut down since I had last been there 7 months ago. What had been just a hiking trail to our camp had been widened to the size of a road by all the tree clearing. The trees are pretty thin and not the best…
Why should it ever have been a carbon sink? I thought forests were neutral as they release carbon when old growth decomposes?
1 if you harvest sustainably and use the lumber for building long lived structures, it might be a sink in the timescale that's important for combating global warming.
2 these forests have been sinking a lot, stands to reason they could alternatively be expanding, which would make them a carbon sink for the duration of the expansion
They’ve been systematically reducing funding, relaxing laws and enforcement, and pushing international preservation fund backers away. The rate at which things have degraded is insane.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/12/brazil-accele...
I spent the last 10 days in a hut on the edge of the Amazon and am in a hotel in Lima, waiting for my flight out of Peru. Seeing this story, I thought I'd add one brief first hand account. The jungle was noticeably cut down since I had last been there 7 months ago. What had been just a hiking trail to our camp had been widened to the size of a road by all the tree clearing. The trees are pretty thin and not the best…
Might this be solved with direct financial subsidies of the locals and/or other investment? What is the COL and population count there?
I spent the last 10 days in a hut on the edge of the Amazon and am in a hotel in Lima, waiting for my flight out of Peru. Seeing this story, I thought I'd add one brief first hand account. The jungle was noticeably cut down since I had last been there 7 months ago. What had been just a hiking trail to our camp had been widened to the size of a road by all the tree clearing. The trees are pretty thin and not the best…
Why are you wasting Earths resources by flying? And for a 10 day vacation at that.
“If we all just conserve enough…”
Flying, for example, emits 2% of global emissions. That’s 100,000 flights a day, every day.
We’ve just spent over 2 decades generating at least 40% of our electricity with coal. The carbon footprint of that was incredible.
While we’ve been waiting for solar and wind to replace it…