|
Re: UN: Cows cause global warming
Amazon rainforest deforestation has been horrendous...not to mention the thousands of additional species or plant and animal life ndiscovered that US forests do not hold.
Deforestation Figures for the Brazilian Amazon, 1978-2005 Year Deforestation [sq mi] Deforestation [sq km] 1978-1988* 8,158 21,130 1989 6,944 17,985 1990 5,332 13,810 1991 4,297 11,130 1992 5,322 13,786 1993 5,950 15,410 1994 5,751 14,896 1995 11,219 29,059 1996 7,013 18,160 1997 5,034 13,040 1998 6,501 16,840 1999 6,663 17,259 2000 7,658 19,836 2001 7,027 18,130 2002 9,845 25,500 2003 9,500 24,605 2004 10,088 26,129 2005 7,298 18,900 TOTAL 211,180 546,905 All figures derived from official National Institute of Space Research (INPA) figures *For the 1978-1988 period the figures represent the average annual rates of deforestation. That is roughly 136 MM acres destroyed since 1978. None has been recovered BUT Brazil is now taking measures to expand the protection of the forest.... http://rainforests.mongabay.com/20brazil.htm |
Re: UN: Cows cause global warming
Originally Posted by Shining Arcanine
(Post 105226)
I do not know about the Boreal and Amazon forests, but in 1920, the United States had 735 million acres of forests. Now, the United States only has 749 million acres of forests. If the losses in the Boreal and Amazon forests are anything like the losses in the United States, it is a cause for celebration.
However, most of the planet is not the US. The Amazon rainforest has lost about 20%. In many countries, it is still a common practice to clearcut huge swaths of forest for farming and timber. Remember, most of the planet is still third world and poor. Being environmentally sound is not exactly their top priority. ~X~ |
Re: UN: Cows cause global warming
When Mount Saint Helens exploded in the 1980s, the surrounding woodlands were completely decimated, but soon after, new vegetation, including trees, began to grow out of the barren desolate landscape.
High deforestation figures are not the worst news that we could have. The worst news that we could have is that new trees are not growing in place of the old ones. Is that the case? |
Re: UN: Cows cause global warming
Originally Posted by Shining Arcanine
(Post 105338)
When Mount Saint Helens exploded in the 1980s, the surrounding woodlands were completely decimated, but soon after, new vegetation, including trees, began to grow out of the barren desolate landscape.
High deforestation figures are not the worst news that we could have. The worst news that we could have is that new trees are not growing in place of the old ones. Is that the case? 1. Lava did not encase the region. 2. Volcanic soil is high in plant nutrients. The deforestation that happens for clear cutting, timber, and paper industries that happen in other countries may or may not replan t the forest. If the land was cleared for expansion or farming, then the forest does not grow back. If it was cleared for timber/paper and not replanted, then plants that wouldn't normally grow in a forest environment (weeds) quickly move in and deprive tree seedlings any chance to grow. Even forest fires are better than human clear cutting. Forest fires deposit a lot of nutrients back in the soil (and trees in forest fire areas have adapted to grow quickly to fight off weeds). In fact, some trees REQUIRE fires for their seedlings to get into the ground. Forest fires happen and go away. Volcanic eruptions happen and go away. Each leaves behind the material for a new forest to grow in it's place. Human industry does not. ~X~ |
Re: UN: Cows cause global warming
Originally Posted by Shining Arcanine
(Post 105226)
I do not know about the Boreal and Amazon forests, but in 1920, the United States had 735 million acres of forests. Now, the United States only has 749 million acres of forests. If the losses in the Boreal and Amazon forests are anything like the losses in the United States, it is a cause for celebration.
If there was a way for us to operate vehicles on methane, Taco Bell sales would go throguh the roof. Bean Burrito runs $0.99, but the effects last awhile!! Seriously though, there has got to be some way that this methane could be harvested for our use. Think about it...it is supposedly harmful to the atmoshpere and plentiful. Harvest it and burn it for energy to help us. But wait, what is the emissoins issues with burning methane? |
Re: UN: Cows cause global warming
Originally Posted by Shining Arcanine
(Post 105338)
When Mount Saint Helens exploded in the 1980s, the surrounding woodlands were completely decimated, but soon after, new vegetation, including trees, began to grow out of the barren desolate landscape.
High deforestation figures are not the worst news that we could have. The worst news that we could have is that new trees are not growing in place of the old ones. Is that the case? |
Re: UN: Cows cause global warming
Originally Posted by Armand
(Post 108731)
New mineral content is introduced to soil when volcanic ash, debris, etc. is brought into play...certainly it takes life but also gives it. I suppose it's a natural cycle that has no comparison to slash/burn/replant tactics.
|
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:36 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands