A global reforestation project is how we fix climate change • Hacker News Board

Re: A global reforestation project is how we fix climate change

#101

Post by pjkundert » Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 4:15 PM UTC

drderidder wrote: post #38

triclops200 wrote: post #8

That only "fixes" climate change as long as the trees continue growing and do not die. When dead, trees release their CO_2 that they've sequestered back into the atmosphere due to decomposition. Therefore, assuming those forests stay around, you've only delayed the problem by sinking a fixed amount of CO_2 away into the living biomass of the trees. The only way to make that a permanent sink would be to biochar the tr…

That's basically, well, not true. When trees break down they contribute to soil organic matter. Approx 58% of SOM is carbon (SOC) making soil one of the largest carbon sinks on the planet. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_organic_matter

If soil continues to accumulate in a healthy form, as it did on the Great Plains over millennia of grazing by bison herds, then yes.

Old growth forests often grow on rocky land, and have little long-term depth accumulation.

Source: hiking old growth forests over decades, and being a farmer.

Re: A global reforestation project is how we fix climate change

#102

Post by NeedMoreTea » Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 4:17 PM UTC

rexpop wrote: post #87

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #80

Far too little, far too late. It may have helped fix climate if we had stopped deforestation in 1992 after the first UN climate summit, used only sustainable wood from that moment on and cleared no mature forest for pasture or palm oil. Oh, and started migrating to zero carbon economies when it would have taken a percent or two reduction a year, rather than the throw ourselves off a reduction cliff required now. Than…

> Thanks politicians! Strange that you would indict the State for failing to legislate Industry, as though the latter had no agency and were therefore uniquely blameless.

States can make regulations, introduce carbon taxes, ban unsafe or unsustainable activity. When was the first international industry emissions reduction summit? How are they doing in comparison to the politicians? Exxon, Shell and BP knew all about the harm they did in the mid 20th century. So they buried it, briefed against it, greenwash us with irrelevant and insignificant adverts.

I indict the states, particularly the developed states, for not bringing forth regulation requiring environmental consideration, emissions reduction, sustainability with penalties encompassing delisting, huge fines and exec imprisonment. Companies are quite happy to drive everyone off a cliff for a little more gold. We've known that since the first days of the Dutch East India Company (VOC).

Re: A global reforestation project is how we fix climate change

#103

Post by ericmay » Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 4:37 PM UTC

How can I today, directly add to creating new trees either through helping to plant, or by donating money?

Re: A global reforestation project is how we fix climate change

#104

Post by bergoid » Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 4:38 PM UTC

pjkundert wrote: post #97

bergoid wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What will be the unintended consequences of foresting deserts I think you are overly concerned but here you raise a good point: foresting a desert could lower the albedo of the Earth. If not offset by the CO2 uptake of the trees, this could have a net greenhouse effect on the climate.

If you’re really worried about albedo, perhaps start questions the impact of gigatons of soot flowing over the North Pole, blackening huge ice fields over the last few decades. Such questions are not tolerated, so be warned.

> Such questions are not tolerated, so be warned.

These are fair questions. Where are they not tolerated? And by whom?

Re: A global reforestation project is how we fix climate change

#105

Post by rtkwe » Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 4:39 PM UTC

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #96

bergoid wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now had we created no-development zones around forests, to allow them to expand naturally, in a world not deforesting at ever increasing rate... I am no fan of rainforest destruction and the ensuing loss of biodiversity, but globally the world is not deforesting: https://phys.org/news/2018-08-global-forest-loss-years-offse...

Rather reinforces my point. Headline: "global forest loss over past 35 years has been more than offset by new forest growth" Replacing the carbon storage of a single 100 metre mature rain forest meranti, and the diverse ecosystem below it by new growth requires how many square miles? It's a net loss for a century, perhaps more. Overall it's a colossal loss. I note that article accounts for area covered only. No menti…

Cutting growth could be carbon positive in some limited circumstances I guess. If it's used to build houses or other structures where the wood doesn't rot in terms of just the materials it /could/ be storage positive if the equivalent land is replanted.

Re: A global reforestation project is how we fix climate change

#106

Post by UnpossibleJim » Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 4:44 PM UTC

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #99

UnpossibleJim wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So should we not try any ideas like this? Just give up and burn it all down, point fingers and say, "I told you it was too late. Look how right I am." I see no solutions offered in any of your written paragraphs and I welcome any and all alternatives.

When a house is on fire, worry about the new extension after the fire is out. Otherwise it's Jevons' paradox writ large. We're still destroying and emitting at ever faster rate. Effort should be going into circular sustainable economies, decarbonising, achieving carbon neutrality, assisting the developing world to carbon neutrality too.

That works under the assumption that we can't do both. We can absolutely work on carbon neutrality and getting the developing world off of coal and oil burning technologies while working on restoring a natural carbon capture system in the form of forests and ecosystems.

Re: A global reforestation project is how we fix climate change

#107

Post by falcolas » Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 4:45 PM UTC

triclops200 wrote: post #8

That only "fixes" climate change as long as the trees continue growing and do not die. When dead, trees release their CO_2 that they've sequestered back into the atmosphere due to decomposition. Therefore, assuming those forests stay around, you've only delayed the problem by sinking a fixed amount of CO_2 away into the living biomass of the trees. The only way to make that a permanent sink would be to biochar the tr…

Let's also not forget that forests burn. And they burn on a regular basis. You also run into tree-specific issues like beetles, which can kill off wide swaths of trees "naturally".

So, natural death and decomp is not the only things to worry about with using forests.

Re: A global reforestation project is how we fix climate change

#108

Post by te_chris » Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 4:52 PM UTC

I urge people to read The Secret Life of Trees (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/28256439-the-hidden-life...). This guy says "This is why we only need to irrigate our forests for about 20 years — once they reach maturity, they will influence their local biome and bring self-sustaining rains.", but, according to the book, most trees are still basically adolescent at 100 years. I love the idea and am an active supporter of rewiliding myself, but you need to understand the timeframes of what you're working with.

Re: A global reforestation project is how we fix climate change

#109

Post by jellicle » Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

> A global reforestation project is how we fix climate change

It isn't. Besides being inadequate even on its own terms, creating large and flammable forests in a time of increasing droughts is just going to lead to megafires, which will instantly eliminate all gains from years of forestation.

We should still plant trees. There's no real downside to doing so except the cost. But you absolutely cannot count on flammable forests locking up carbon forever. Forests burn, they get cut down for firewood, bad things happen to them.

Tree-planting is, like, 1% of what needs to be done, not 90%. It's a 1% solution.

Re: A global reforestation project is how we fix climate change

#110

Post by te_chris » Thu, Jan 16, 2020, 4:54 PM UTC

jacknews wrote: post #25

triclops200 wrote: post #8

That only "fixes" climate change as long as the trees continue growing and do not die. When dead, trees release their CO_2 that they've sequestered back into the atmosphere due to decomposition. Therefore, assuming those forests stay around, you've only delayed the problem by sinking a fixed amount of CO_2 away into the living biomass of the trees. The only way to make that a permanent sink would be to biochar the tr…

if you biochar fallen trees and litter, and then bury it, it stays sequestered for a long time. It also improves the soil long term - particularly in sandy soils it helps water retention. Obviously this is much more work that just planting and forgetting though.

You don't need to biochar them, in a forest ecosystem they take care of themselves.