[deleted]
China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990
211–220 of 666 posts
Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990
#212Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Are you from country 404 by any chance? Because that's how these posts read. You may read it whatever way you like. If we look at the facts - statista and globalwatch is some Western sites/orgs, topwar is straight Russian and Guardian is Great Britain. >Kind reminder - this is not reddit. This is why you're using that offensive "404" notation (an expression of the Russian propaganda point that Ukraine isn't a sovere…
Well, they aren’t. Never have been and never will be. Geopolitics is a ruthless game and those in the middle sometimes get crushed. Which is why you generally want natural borders (mountains, coast, etc).
>Well, they aren’t. Never have been
Like Ukranians a number of nations - for example Hungarians, Chezh, Finnish, Latvians, Estonians, etc. - for centuries didn't have their own state and were parts of larger empires and got their own states only relatively recently.
Like any other, the Russian propaganda thrives on people's ignorance. In this case "Ukranian people and Ukraine don't exist and never have existed, it is just an inferior kind of Russians on historically Russian territory". That is why nor Russian textbooks nor wide Russian info space never mention the 1651 book by French engineer D'Beauplan "Description of Ukraine, a Province of the Kingdom of Poland situated between Moskovia and Transilvania" where he clearly describes in detail a separate Ukrainian ethnicity living on their own separate territory (which is pretty close to the territory of modern Ukraine. Also note that Russia din't even exist back then, it was just a "Moscovia" duchy).
>and never will be. Geopolitics is a ruthless game and those in the middle sometimes get crushed. Which is why you generally want natural borders (mountains, coast, etc).
The same applies to all the above mentioned nations, and this is why they joined NATO, and why Ukraine is trying to.
Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
> embrace and profit massively off of next gen energy infrastructure Our children’s generation will never forgive us for abandoning nuclear energy abundance. Truly a crime against humanity.
I used to be a true believe in nuclear (in the 80s, 90s). Recently, I thought (with good justification) that it's a folly to build out nuclear if renewables' economics continue on the current path. Recently, I wonder if a nuclear winter (I mean this in the cold war context) is likely enough to make renewables massively less efficient. If the current administration were more competent, I'd assume that they are pushing…
I was pretty into nuclear as well but it's pretty obvious that solar/wind with battery storage is the future. For the price of a single reactor you can build out like 5x the capacity with other renewables. That's also accounting for the down periods.
It's kinda fitting that NOW trump jumps on board with nuclear, once the data says it isn't really necessary anymore. It's possible we can maybe build some useful small reactors for some stuff, but yeah.
Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990
#215Wise to use forests to contain deserts. Problem is that China still plays a big role in importing deforestation-linked commodities and fund overseas projects that exacerbate global loses. There are low tree survival rates and falsified coverage, like the Three-North Shelterbelt program which is plagued by inefficiencies over its 40 years of operation. It's also hard to balance afforestation without causing scarcity o…
[flagged]
Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990
#216India too has been adding more green cover than ever. Higher CO2 in atmosphere leads to faster growth of forests. But more important factor is urbanization for India. As people move to cities the need to cut down trees goes down.
One nice thing about these developing countries is due to the power infrastructure tends to be not very good - which prompts people to take things into their hands and install solar, not to save the planet but to stave off brownouts, and be able to run the AC around the clock to stave off the heat. For residential, solar + batteries straight up beats legacy infra on cost, and with the upcoming cheap sodium batteries,…
Like how mobile payments took off in Africa early because they weren't held back by existing infrastructure.
Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
...do nuclear bombs release significant amounts of CO2? I didn't think they did.
Not the detonation itself (if we don't count the fires it may cause), but the total CO2 cost of nukes is high [1]: > A bomb on its own does not emit carbon dioxide… It’s the infrastructure, the construction (cement emits a lot), fossil fuel use, manpower, consumption, supply chains etc that all contribute. > A study published in the Energy & Environmental Science journal has documented that using 1/1000 of the total…
I feel it's worth pointing out that this is where some folks brains kind of break when the "cost" of a good is mentioned.
It's the massive infrastructure to do the things profitably at scale that is often the problem with much of the stuff we consume and use. Then the "cost" of the environmental damage down the line. The "intangibles" get split up.
Then we see these insane figures when these intangibles are all lumped together. This further disconnects people's brains from the real scale of what's going. Cuz our brains suck with big numbers.
Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990
#218Wise to use forests to contain deserts. Problem is that China still plays a big role in importing deforestation-linked commodities and fund overseas projects that exacerbate global loses. There are low tree survival rates and falsified coverage, like the Three-North Shelterbelt program which is plagued by inefficiencies over its 40 years of operation. It's also hard to balance afforestation without causing scarcity o…
Honest question, aren't coral reefs also very sensitive to climate change? How much of that loss is because of regional activities and how much is due to global environmental changes?
Considering that China is responsible for ~25% of cumulative CO2 emissions to date, there's not much difference between the regional and global inputs.
Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990
#219Wise to use forests to contain deserts. Problem is that China still plays a big role in importing deforestation-linked commodities and fund overseas projects that exacerbate global loses. There are low tree survival rates and falsified coverage, like the Three-North Shelterbelt program which is plagued by inefficiencies over its 40 years of operation. It's also hard to balance afforestation without causing scarcity o…
Honest question, aren't coral reefs also very sensitive to climate change? How much of that loss is because of regional activities and how much is due to global environmental changes?
So, something has been bugging me. Coral is one of the oldest animals.
They've been around for over half a billion years.
They survived the Great Dying, which killed 80-95% of marine species.
And now the ocean gets 0.9 C warmer and it's game over for coral?
Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990
#220Wise to use forests to contain deserts. Problem is that China still plays a big role in importing deforestation-linked commodities and fund overseas projects that exacerbate global loses. There are low tree survival rates and falsified coverage, like the Three-North Shelterbelt program which is plagued by inefficiencies over its 40 years of operation. It's also hard to balance afforestation without causing scarcity o…
It’s hard to reason about where China is today with forestation. Obviously their efforts from 20 years ago didn’t do much good, probably due to corruption and mismanagement. Today they seem to have solved so issues, is it could really be working. The primary resource they need to manage is water, and any effort that requires too much water (especially water diverted from local farmers) isn’t sustainable.