It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Drying Amazon Could Be A Major Carbon Concern

page: 1
15

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 01:05 PM
link   


Climate Central wrote an article based on a study published by The Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences



“It’s well-established fact that a large part of Amazon is drying. We’ve been able to link that decline in precipitation to a decline in greenness over the last 10 years,” said Thomas Hilker, lead author of the study and forestry expert at Oregon State University.

Since 2000, rainfall has decreased by up to 25 percent across a vast swath of the southeastern Amazon, according to the new satellite analysis by Hilker. The cause of the decline in rainfall hasn’t been pinpointed, though deforestation and changes in atmospheric circulation are possible culprits.


Thomas Hilker goes on to hypothesize that the current trend could make super El Ninos, likely increasing the odds of more drought.




posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: theNLBS

I have to wonder who thought clear-cutting millions of acres of rainforest would have no negative effects on the ecosystem in the first place.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientiaFortisDefendit

I don't know who came up with that idea, but it was a dumb one. If don't stop the clear cutting of the Amazon rainforest, planet earth is truly doomed. The Amazon forest and the sub-Saharan jungles of Africa along with the jungles and forests of south east Asia are climate "drivers" the planet depends on to maintain the natural thermostatic flows that keep the planet from over heating/over cooling. Kill the jungles and forests and you kill the planet.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientiaFortisDefendit

The people of the Amazon do not care about climate, most probably have no idea what that even is. They care about feeding their bellies, and getting into the modern age. Before you sit in judgement, look at our own clear cutting policies and how the US used to be solid forrest up to the plains.

We cannot halt progress in 3rd world countries it is the height of arrogance. We are very fond of pointing fingers and worring that 'others' are ruining the planet. We more than did our share in our time.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Rape the forests and you'll breed deserts, it's quite simple.

We are probably going to reach the point where we will actually have to terraform our own planet...which will then defeat the origins of the word terraform in itself.

I blame the people in power that have suppressed technologies.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Iamschist

Okay, so "Not our country, not our business"? I suppose that might be a good idea in most cases, but when someone is doing something so damaging to the entire ecosystem, it becomes everyone's business.

Also, I am not sitting in JUDGMENT, simply making a statement that I'm sure most everyone would agree with. Pretty defensive of you to say.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Trees bring rain. Amazing to learn how much carbon dioxide is/was stored within the Amazon forests.


The decrease mostly affected an area of tropical forest 12 times the size of California, as well as adjacent grasslands and other forest types. The browning of that area, which is in the southern Amazon, accounted for more than half the loss of greenness observed by satellites. While the decrease in greenness is comparatively small compared with the overall lushness of the rainforest, the impacts could be outsize.

That’s because the amount of carbon the Amazon stores is staggering. An estimated 120 billion tons of carbon are stashed in its plants and soil. Much of that carbon gets there via the forest flora that suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.

Worldwide, “it essentially takes up 25 percent of global carbon cycle that vegetation is responsible for,” Hilker said. “It’s a huge carbon stock.


There are good reasons, I guess, for continuing to destroy forests. The U.S. did it long ago and what the one poster said is true - who are we to cast stones?

Why Are Rainforests Being Destroyed

As our civilization reaches out to these areas and instills in them a desire for our lifestyle, how are we supposed to preach to them about the dangers of de-forestation? And, unfortunately for us, these rain forests are among our last line of defense against global warming and all of the ugly cousins i.e. drought, heat, stagnant air, deep freezes, monster storms, biblical deluges etc. etc.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 03:38 PM
link   
The forest area of Russia is 49 %, then there is the forestry of north america, Europe, the rest of south america, Asia, more than enough to cover any loss in Amazonia, plus the sea algae, it seems to me there is more than enough 'green' to keep oxygen breathers happy.
Any CO2 that Amazonia does not use will be welcomed by the rest of the CO2 breathers.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 04:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: pikestaff
The forest area of Russia is 49 %, then there is the forestry of north america, Europe, the rest of south america, Asia, more than enough to cover any loss in Amazonia, plus the sea algae, it seems to me there is more than enough 'green' to keep oxygen breathers happy.
Any CO2 that Amazonia does not use will be welcomed by the rest of the CO2 breathers.


According to this thesis, there is a difference in how forests located at different latitudes behave regarding carbon dioxide uptake.

Forests as carbon sinks


...the boreal forest stores most of its carbon in the soils, whereas the tropical forest stores most of the carbon in the plant biomass.

The future climate changes, caused by the increasing levels of CO2, will mostly affect the boreal forest by increasing the frequency of natural disturbances such as fire and insect outbreaks.


So, apparently, as my grandmother used to say, "one hand holds the rag and the other holds the soap." In other words, the life and health of boreal forests is joined at the hip to the life and health of rain forests. (I hate it when nature, herself, globalizes because of what political globalism has come to mean i.e. nothing good for you or me BUT, in nature, that's how it's always been.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Iamschist
a reply to: ScientiaFortisDefendit

The people of the Amazon do not care about climate, most probably have no idea what that even is. They care about feeding their bellies, and getting into the modern age. Before you sit in judgement, look at our own clear cutting policies and how the US used to be solid forrest up to the plains.

We cannot halt progress in 3rd world countries it is the height of arrogance. We are very fond of pointing fingers and worring that 'others' are ruining the planet. We more than did our share in our time.


That's just dumb. It's like burning your foot in a fire and not telling the child next to you not to do the same thing just because you 've already done it. And since the US is so great at throwing money to other countries, why not this area? Oh right, no oil. The short term effects are already beginning to be devastating.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 06:09 PM
link   
deforestation

trees are a major climate driver

but the UN would have us believe its our breath and farts that's doing it .



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 07:21 PM
link   
No no no no....taxes are going to save the planet!

Trees are just making oxygen, providing a habitat for thousands of animal species, creating shade cooling down the earth, shedding their leaves to nourish the soil. Pffft! Can we charge them for it? No, then we don't need them.

MO-NEY MO-NEY MO-NEY!!!



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 08:42 PM
link   
Where are all the climate change deniers? I guess this particular thread is harder to argue with? Or is it because the thread didn't explicitly say "global warming" or "climate change" in the title?



posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 01:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: tavi45
Where are all the climate change deniers? I guess this particular thread is harder to argue with? Or is it because the thread didn't explicitly say "global warming" or "climate change" in the title?


Because Brazilian loggers aren't as powerful and wealthy and connected with the denialist propaganda machine as right-wing Americans and coal miners.

And because it's a wee bit even more obviously idiotic to say that trees falling down is part of some unexplained "natural cycle" when it's from chainsaws.
edit on 30-10-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 01:18 AM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

I don't follow. I doubt many Brazilian loggers are members of ATS. And the thread isn't about trees falling down.....

I was just musing on the lack of presence of the climate deniers. They jump in on the threads that mention the issue explicitly.



new topics

top topics



 
15

log in

join