Afforestation will hardly dent warming problem: study

June 19, 2011

Converting croplands or marginal lands to forests will make almost no inroads against global warming, a study says

Enlarge

Schemes to convert croplands or marginal lands to forests will make almost no inroads against global warming this century, a scientific study published on Sunday said.

Schemes to convert croplands or marginal lands to forests will make almost no inroads against global warming this century, a scientific study published on Sunday said.

Afforestation is being encouraged under the UN's under the theory that forests are "sinks" that soak up carbon dioxide (CO2) from the air through .

But environmental researchers, in a new probe, said that even massive conversion of land to forestry would have only a slender benefit against the greenhouse-gas problem.

This is partly because forests take decades to mature and CO2 is a long-lasting molecule, able to lurk for centuries in the atmosphere.

But another reason is that forests, even as they absorb greenhouse gas, are darker than and thus absorb more -- and in high latitudes, this may even result in net warming.

Vivek Arora of the University of Victoria in British Columbia and Alvaro Montenegro of St. Francis Xavier University in Nova Scotia modelled five scenarios in which afforestation was carried out over 50 years, from 2011 to 2060.

They used a Canadian programme called CanESM1 that simulated the impacts on land, sea and air if Earth's surface temperature rose by some 3.0 degrees Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) by 2100 compared to 1850.

Even if all the cropland in the world were afforested, this would reduce the warming by only 0.45 C (0.81 F) by a timescale of 2081-2100, according to the study, which appears in the journal Nature Geoscience.

Fifty-percent afforestation would brake it by an even tinier 0.25 C (0.45 F).

Both scenarios are, of course, wildly unrealistic because of the need to grow food.

Fifty-percent afforestation would require at least a doubling in crop yield to feed the because half of the crop area would be taken out of use.

The other three scenarios found that afforestation in the tropics was three times more efficient at "avoided warming" than in northerly latitudes and temperate regions.

The study said that afforestation does have other benefits, for the economy and the ecoystem.

"There's nothing wrong with afforestation, it is positive, but our findings say that it's not a response to temperature control if we are going to be emitting (greenhouse gases) this way," Montenegro told AFP.

The study said bluntly, "Afforestation is not a substitute for reduced greenhouse-gas emissions."

In forest programmes, policymakers would be advised to focus afforestation efforts in the tropics but also push hard against deforestation, which accounts for 10 to 20 percent of emissions globally.

Avoiding deforestation is under discussion for post-2012 climate action under the UN flag.

(c) 2011 AFP

4.2 /5 (9 votes)  

Filter


Move the slider to adjust rank threshold, so that you can hide some of the comments.


Display comments: newest first

xznofile
Jun 19, 2011

Rank: 3 / 5 (3)
Is a global warming conference or legislation coming up or in progress? Science media is full of claims and counter propaganda with the only effect of confusion and stress. I conclude that neither quick-fix nor long term solutions will work because we need permission from politicians who only respond to money.
MikPetter
Jun 19, 2011

Rank: 2 / 5 (4)
I think this is a useful piece of research but it doesn't look at the full picture by not including rangelands in their scenarios.
Telekinetic
Jun 19, 2011

Rank: 4 / 5 (2)
What's happened to 90% of the old growth here in America? Timbered for three centuries, with as much forethought as with bison hunting. Why not grow food vertically, the way cities house large populations? Chicago is already creating green roofs to reduce overheating. Some creative engineering could bring our forests back.
paulthebassguy
Jun 19, 2011

Rank: 2.6 / 5 (15)
Okay, perhaps it won't have an immediate effect, but it is still surely worthwhile in the long term to have these forests.
Shakescene21
Jun 19, 2011

Rank: 4.3 / 5 (4)
I doubt that the model fully accounted for the carbon sequestered in the soil, which usually builds up in forest land and diminishes in cropland. This amounts to a significant difference over decades and is a huge amount of carbon build-up over centuries and milennia.
Gilbert
Jun 19, 2011

Rank: 4 / 5 (1)
not to mention the Immediate benefit it would have for fauna.

One point in the article about forests generally being darker than crops, wouldn't that create a heat sink, and this would transfer heat to the ground from the air? which would mean warmer nights, but cooler days, IMO that would reduce the occurrence of extreme weather events as it would regulate temperatures?
newsreader
Jun 19, 2011

Rank: 3.7 / 5 (6)

So now the other shoe drops and we start to see just how difficult it is to reverse the build up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. I feel very sorry for todays children. They are going to have an awful mess on their hands.
hush1
Jun 19, 2011

Rank: 5 / 5 (3)
"I feel very sorry for todays children. They are going to have an awful mess on their hands." - newsreader

We'll make a deal with you. Provide no-strings-attached-no-limit-agenda-free funding instead of telling us you are sorry.

And our efforts to save ourselves from your past will flourish. We are highly motivated and inspired. Nothing less than our existence is at stake. Extinction is not an option.

Or save money and feel sorry.
Galen_Slade
Jun 20, 2011

Rank: 1.1 / 5 (8)
AGW is an utter fraud - study. Let's all worship at the shrine of Gaia and bow to her high priest "Global Warming". There is exactly ZERO evidence supporting AGW, outside of a very small band of discredited crackpots and so called "scientists" that make up statistics as they please. Oh, and and politicians pushing "green energy" and, incidentally, making incredible fortunes keeping the fable of AGW alive.

I call this entire thing BS...
Deesky
Jun 20, 2011

Rank: 4.4 / 5 (7)
There is exactly ZERO evidence supporting AGW, outside of a very small band of discredited crackpots and so called "scientists"

Ha, ha, ha. You know you're talking to a crank when you hear phrases like:

* The arrogance of 'these scientists', presuming to know it all.
* (Macro)Evolution is just a theory, not fact.
* The neutron repulsion...
* In AWT theory...
* Black holes are no more real than the Big Bang, dark matter or dark energy.
* The evidence for god is in the irreducible complexity of...(insert body part).
* You cannot prove that god doesn't exist, therefore, he does.
* Those 'scientists' are in it just for the grant money - they don't care about us.
* The climate is not warming, it's cooling. See ClimateGate conspiracy.
* The Bible says...
* The progressive, socialist liberals just want to redistrubute our wealth.
* Government should pack its bags and let Corporations and Free Market rule - death to the EPA!
FrankHerbert
Jun 20, 2011

Rank: 2 / 5 (8)
Ha, ha, ha. You know you're talking to a moron when you hear phrases like:


Fixed that for you ;-)
Telekinetic
Jun 20, 2011

Rank: 5 / 5 (4)
Here's a solution to this tedious argument: We hire people like Galen Slade to live and monitor the most polluted regions on the globe, a human "canary in a coal mine" so to speak. We take blood samples, lung capacity tests, etc., and we'll pay them very well,
which is fine, because it won't be for very long.
frenchie
Jun 20, 2011

Rank: not rated yet
@deesky - Thank you that was a great laugh and pretty much spot on.

:)

MarkyMark
Jun 21, 2011

Rank: 3.5 / 5 (2)


I call this entire thing BS...

Well you would know all about BS as you certainly produce a lot of it youself judging by your post.
Moebius
Jun 27, 2011

Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
What a joke. Discussing reforestation and concluding that our minimum efforts wouldn't do much. Meanwhile we allow Brazil to destroy their gigantic rainforest. That rainforest belongs to the world and they are harming all of us by destroying it. That's where military intervention would actually do some long term good.
Rank 4.2 /5 (9 votes)
Relevant PhysicsForums posts

More news stories

Sophisticated simulations predict future warming

The chances of our planet being hit by a global warming of 3 degrees Celsius by 2050 is as likely as it being hit by an increase of 1.4 degrees, new research shows. Presented in the journal Nature Geoscience, the British study ...

Space & Earth / Earth Sciences

created May 22, 2012 | popularity 4.4 / 5 (9) | comments 51

Kyoto Protocol architect 'frustrated' by climate dialogue

UN climate talks are going nowhere, as politicians dither or bicker while the pace of warming dangerously speeds up, one of the architects of the Kyoto Protocol told AFP.

Space & Earth / Environment

created May 23, 2012 | popularity 3.7 / 5 (7) | comments 39

Aliens don't want to eat us, says former SETI director

Alien life probably isn’t interested in having us for dinner, enslaving us or laying eggs in our bellies, according to a recent statement by former SETI director Jill Tarter.

Space & Earth / Space Exploration

created May 25, 2012 | popularity 4.4 / 5 (13) | comments 37

Dragon arrives at space station in historic 1st (Update 2)

The privately bankrolled Dragon capsule made a historic arrival at the International Space Station on Friday, triumphantly captured by astronauts wielding a giant robot arm.

Space & Earth / Space Exploration

created May 25, 2012 | popularity 5 / 5 (10) | comments 19

What's the big deal about private space launches?

(AP) -- The first private spaceship is headed to the International Space Station. Some questions and answers about the cargo mission by Space Exploration Technologies, known as SpaceX:

Space & Earth / Space Exploration

created May 22, 2012 | popularity 5 / 5 (6) | comments 32


Nvidia trumpets Tegra 3 phone design wins for 2012

(Phys.org) -- Nvidia’s competitive war paint has a name, Tegra 3. On the heels of Nvidia announcements about lowering costs of its Tegra 3 processors and Nvidia-enabled tablets running Android Ice Cream ...

Browser wars flare in mobile space

The browser wars are heating up again, but this time the fight is for dominance of the mobile Internet.

Scientist: Evolution debate will soon be history

(AP) -- Richard Leakey predicts skepticism over evolution will soon be history. Not that the avowed atheist has any doubts himself.

Dell tablet leak: 10.1-inch display, two-battery choice

(Phys.org) -- Headline after headline talks about vendors’ tablets in the wings as likely number-one contenders for the iPad. Such claims have justifiably been taken with a grain of salt, considering ...

Keep food safety in mind this memorial day weekend

(HealthDay) -- Picnics, parades and cookouts are as much a part of Memorial Day weekend as tributes to the United States' war veterans.

Social welfare cuts ultimately come with heavy price, researchers say

(Phys.org) -- Slashing government funding for Medicaid, food stamps and other programs that serve the poor – while politically popular with some lawmakers and many conservatives – may do more harm ...