Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Future forests may soak up more carbon dioxide than previously believed, helping to buffer climate…

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-11 03:08 PM
Original message
Future forests may soak up more carbon dioxide than previously believed, helping to buffer climate…
http://ns.umich.edu/htdocs/releases/story.php?id=8614
Oct. 13, 2011

U-M ecologist: Future forests may soak up more carbon dioxide than previously believed, helping to buffer climate change

ANN ARBOR, Mich.—North American forests appear to have a greater capacity to soak up heat-trapping carbon dioxide gas than researchers had previously anticipated.

As a result, they could help slow the pace of human-caused climate warming more than most scientists had thought, a U-M ecologist and his colleagues have concluded.

The results of a 12-year study at an experimental forest in northeastern Wisconsin challenge several long-held assumptions about how future forests will respond to the rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide blamed for human-caused climate change, said University of Michigan microbial ecologist Donald Zak, lead author of a paper published online this week in Ecology Letters.

"Some of the initial assumptions about ecosystem response are not correct and will have to be revised," said Zak, a professor at the U-M School of Natural Resources and Environment and the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology in the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts.

Refresh | +9 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
libinnyandia Donating Member (526 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-11 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. trees to the rescue
How much will that postpone the worst case scenarios. And didn't Reagan blame trees for pollution. The GOP will want to cut down thsoe trees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-11 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. I don’t think it will postpone things much
As is frequently pointed out, things already appear to be happening faster than expected, so… (assuming the trees are already postponing developments, that means that things won’t happen as much faster than expected as they might have otherwise.)

As for Reagan… well… let’s just say there was a (very) small grain of truth in what he said.
"Approximately 80 percent of our air pollution stems from hydrocarbons released by vegetation."

What he was talking about was “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smog#Photochemical_smog">photochemical smog.” The scoop is that vegetation can give off http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volatile_organic_compound#Biologically_generated_VOCs">Volatile Organic Compounds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
libinnyandia Donating Member (526 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-11 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. trees to the rescue pt 2
What if we have more droughts and the trees burn?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
FiveGoodMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-11 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
3. What makes anyone think that TPTB will allow future forests?
Can't make enough money on them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-11 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
5. That is good news. Now they need to use some other important
species of tree (fruit, nut, etc) to see if they are going to survive the future. At least we will have maple sugar and shade trees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-11 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
6. What future forests? I am sure in theory what they're saying could be
True, but in reality every thirty seconds we lose another piece of Amazon forest the size of a football field.

And when the XL Pipeline goes through, North America's number one boreal forest will be destroyed as well. Once the water table is gone, the trees will simply slowly die - as they cannot exist off of a diesel fuel-tainted aquifer.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-13-11 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
7. There was a map of the great forests of the world that showed
New England all reforested. I did not know that forests there have taken over from farms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC