Planting a trillion trees could be the "most effective solution" to climate change, study says

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/planting-a-trillion-trees-could-be-the-most-effective-solution-to-climate-change/#

According to a new study in the journal Science, planting billions of trees around the world would be the cheapest and most effective way to tackle the climate crisis. Since trees absorb carbon dioxide, which contributes to global warming, a worldwide planting initiative could remove a substantial portion of heat-trapping emissions from the atmosphere.

The researchers say a program at this scale could remove about two-thirds of the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions caused by human activities since the start of the industrial revolution, or nearly 25% of the CO2 in the atmosphere.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Swaye

I planted two trees in my back forty this morning. Not kidding.

GrundleStiltzkin

RaceBannon

https://mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/more-trees-than-there-were-100-years-ago-its-true

In the United States, which contains 8 percent of the world's forests, there are more trees than there were 100 years ago. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), "Forest growth nationally has exceeded harvest since the 1940s. By 1997, forest growth exceeded harvest by 42 percent and the volume of forest growth was 380 percent greater than it had been in 1920." The greatest gains have been seen on the East Coast (with average volumes of wood per acre almost doubling since the '50s) which was the area most heavily logged by European settlers beginning in the 1600s, soon after their arrival.

This is great news for those who care about the environment because trees store CO2, produce oxygen — which is necessary for all life on Earth — remove toxins from the air, and create habitat for animals, insects and more basic forms of life. Well-managed forest plantations like those overseen by the Forest Stewardship Council also furnish us with wood, a renewable material that can be used for building, furniture, paper products and more, and all of which are biodegradable at the end of their lifecycle.

Gwad

I think the current administration is attempting to or has opened the gates on those forests.

RaceBannon

I think the current administration is attempting to or has opened the gates on those forests.

Let go of the fear

Gwad

I think the current administration is attempting to or has opened the gates on those forests.
Let go of the fear

of illegal immigrants?

RaceBannon

The science is settled

There are more trees now than ever
The world has more trees than anyone previously thought. A study conducted by 38 scientists and published by the journal Nature found that there are over 3 trillion trees on the planet, several times higher than previous estimates. There are 3 tillion trees on Earth. Pictured are some of them.Dec 16, 2015

RaceBannon

I think the current administration is attempting to or has opened the gates on those forests.
Let go of the fear
of illegal immigrants?

Try to stay on topic. Its your topic

RaceBannon

https://npr.org/2019/06/12/731713229/trump-administration-seeking-to-overhaul-forest-management-rules

Federal land managers on Wednesday proposed sweeping rule changes to a landmark environmental law that would allow them to fast-track certain forest management projects, including logging and prescribed burning.

The U.S. Forest Service, under Chief Vicki Christiansen, is proposing revisions to its National Environmental Policy Act regulations that could limit environmental review and public input on projects ranging from forest health and wildfire mitigation to infrastructure upgrades to commercial logging on federal land.

"We do more analysis than we need, we take more time than we need and we slow down important work to protect communities," Christiansen told NPR.

The proposed rule changes include an expansion of "categorical exclusions." These are often billed as tools that give land managers the discretion to bypass full-blown environmental studies in places where they can demonstrate there would be no severe impacts or degradation to the land.

The Forest Service insists this is not about ramping up commercial logging in public forests. On average, according to Christiansen, it can take big restoration projects that generally have broad support as long as two years to approve. She predicts that time could be cut by more than half if the rule changes move forward.

"Let me be clear that the Forest Service will continue to deliver high-quality, science-based analysis," she said. "We're proposing more efficiency, not shortcutting. In fact, [we're] enhancing, where we can, public involvement."

Federal agencies have long complained of "analysis paralysis" when it comes to getting large landscape-scale projects approved. Policymakers frequently decry what they call frivolous lawsuits by litigious-minded environmental groups who use the courts to try to stop logging on public land.

But according to the government's own analysis — the last done in 2010 during the Obama administration — fewer than one-fifth of all timber and forest projects are appealed by citizens or environmental groups. A bigger holdup is budget cuts, particularly in the Forest Service, where money has been diverted away from wildlife, habitat and forestry programs to pay for the skyrocketing costs of wildfire suppression.

The proposed rule changes are subject to a 60-day public comment period. Barring litigation or other holdups, the Forest Service hopes to finalize them by summer of next year.

Gwad

I feel like you came into a thread about planting trees and came to say their are enough trees. It seems you have a really small and fragile childish ego. Go out and challenge yourself grow a little bro ham.

GrundleStiltzkin

I am PRO trees.

RaceBannon

I feel like you came into a thread about planting trees and came to say their are enough trees. It seems you have a really small and fragile childish ego. Go out and challenge yourself grow a little bro ham.

I don't care what you feel

I came in with facts to make you a little less scared and maybe sleep a little better tonight

I made no comment on their being "enough" trees. I am a man of science providing the science that is settled

Gwad

Ok it has been declared that Race can go copy paste an article and call himself a man of science. Welcome to the new age!!!

RaceBannon

Ok it has been declared that Race can go copy paste an article and call himself a man of science. Welcome to the new age!!!

Did you not start this thread with a copy and paste?

Do you have an issue with what I posted or are you determined that the sky fall regardless of science?

Gwad

I'm sorry that contemplating what could go wrong is painful for you Race.

RaceBannon

I'm sorry that contemplating what could go wrong is painful for you Race.

Link?

PurpleThrobber

Sounds good.

Put the homeless to work planting trees.

Gwad

I'm sorry that contemplating what could go wrong is painful for you Race.
Link?

https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/62831/planting-a-trillion-trees-could-be-the-most-effective-solution-to-climate-change-study-says#latest

RaceBannon

I'm sorry that contemplating what could go wrong is painful for you Race.
Link?
https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/62831/planting-a-trillion-trees-could-be-the-most-effective-solution-to-climate-change-study-says#latest

Did you not want a discussion on trees when you started this thread?

I'm contributing

You've added nothing

Was this another troll job?

Gwad

I'm sorry that contemplating what could go wrong is painful for you Race.
Link?
https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/62831/planting-a-trillion-trees-could-be-the-most-effective-solution-to-climate-change-study-says#latest
Did you not want a discussion on trees when you started this thread?

I'm contributing

You've added nothing

Was this another troll job?

https://www.tentree.com/blogs/posts/fact-check-are-there-really-more-trees-today-than-100-years-ago#targetText=However great the news is,about world-wide tree harvests.&targetText=Today, annual tree harvest vs,re-plant about 5 billion.

However great the news is that we’re adding trees back in the United States, there are still serious concerns about world-wide tree harvests. We have chopped the total number of trees in half since the advent of humans on our surface.

Today, annual tree harvest vs. production on a world-wide scale shows that humans cut down approximately 15 billion trees a year and re-plant about 5 billion.

That’s a net loss of 10 billion trees every year, and a rate that would mean the loss of all trees within the next 300 years. That sounds like a long time, but your great-great-great-grandchildren may not have the same perspective as you do on that topic.