Trees Are Not The Answer To Climate Change
Thu, Jan 3, 2008
What was once seen as the solution to all our CO2 problems, the ability of trees to soak up anthropogenic carbon dioxide,
has itself been hindered by global warming.
A 20-year analysis of 30 sites in the frozen north has discovered that trees ability to take in CO2 is weakening. Whereas once it was assumed that just by planting more trees we could slow down the climate change tide. These results tell us unquestionably that we need to stop passing the buck, and stop creating CO2.
Usually the carbon dioxide, which we create, is taken in by plants and oceans and in most cases stored for future release. But this isn’t the end of the carbon story. Plants release carbon when they decompose. This creates a cycle of carbon. The higher temperatures brought on by climate change has not only increased the growth of trees and plants across the world, which will soak up our excess CO2. But, also produce it, through the action of decomposing microbes, as trees decompose when they come to the end of the growing season.
Recent evidence from around the world shows that winter is starting later and spring earlier. In northern attitudes, spring and autumn temperatures have risen by 1.1ºC and 0.8ºC respectively in the past two decades. This means a longer growing season for plants, which scientists thought should be a good thing for slowing the warming. The increased growth is even visible from space, with satellite measurements indicating a greening of the land.
However, the new data suggests that is too simplistic. The team analysed data from more than 30 monitoring stations spread across northern regions including Siberia, Alaska, Canada and Europe. The data, which goes back to 1980, charts the levels of CO2 in the local atmosphere. This is a product of both uptake by plants during photosynthesis and release of CO2 by plants and microbes during respiration.
The team focused particularly on the date in autumn at which the forests switched from being a net sink for carbon into a net source. Instead of decomposition occurring later in the year, it is actually getting earlier - in some places by a few days, but in others by a few weeks.
The results go a long way to explain recent studies which suggest that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing faster than expected – meaning that global warming will accelerate. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which created the Kyoto Protocol, has concluded that humanity has eight years left to prevent the worst effects of global warming.
On the recent findings Colin Prentice of the University of Bristol, noted that:
“The precise effect the trend will have on future warming is hard to predict. Over a longer period of decades, models predict changes in vegetation structure, including tundra regions becoming forested, and the forests tend to take up far more carbon than the tundra. So I would be sceptical about reading any particular future implication into these findings.”
With increased CO2 production by China, it is difficult to wait to see how plants evolve to the new climate before we make our move. Time and again scientific evidence is telling us to step up to the mark, the only way to reduce the planets current problem is to stop emitting CO2. And even then an uphill struggle remains in reducing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere to an acceptable level. Tomorrow’s world will be an interesting one.
If you want to find out all the latest climate change news, why not subcribe to our RSS feed, we’ll even throw in a free album.
1 Trackbacks For This Post
-
MK Web - Blog » Trees Are Not The Answer To Climate Change Says:
January 4th, 2008 at 5:18 pm[...] Take: So does that mean we should stop breathing?read more | digg story [...]
Popular Posts
| Music Venues London There are music venues in London with great reviews! Read up on the choices on Qype. |
January 3rd, 2008 at 7:59 pm
This is an interesting piece, but I think the title is a little too reactionary. Certainly trees are not the answer, but there’s little question that they are not part of the answer. There is scientific consensus that deforestation causes up 20 percent of human-caused climate change, and that deforestation in tropical rainforests is a big driver of climate change. So let’s not dismiss trees out of hand as part of the solution.
January 3rd, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Dave,
That’s an interesting point. A couple of things really. Firstly, the title may be a little reactionary, but I think it’s the kind of thing that makes people listen and draws them into reading. I think this can be ok, so long as the information presented is not innacurate or very biased.
Secondly, I’d also like to add something - I believe our society’s focus on CO2 is slightly misguided. CO2 is by no means the only greenhouse gas, and it is not the most damaging - methane is far more harmful and vast quantities are produced by agriculture. This accounts for 15% of all greenhouse gasses. Let’s also not forget volcanoes!
However, nature does often provide a solution to these things, for example, plankton sequesters CO2 from volcanoes and other sources. A delicate balance is created. This article I think looks at one small part of the equation, which I think is useful when wanting to understand the whole picture. Therefore I do take your point that we shouldn’t dismiss trees.
I unfortunately don’t understand enough about global warming to talk about all of these subjects in great depth, but that’s why I started Environmental Graffiti, so I could learn more!
January 4th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
“These results tell us unquestionably that we need to stop passing the buck, and stop creating CO2.”
OK, everyone stop breathing.
I find some elements of this story somewhat wrong, plants don’t store CO2 for one, they use it, storing the carbon for their own growth and releasing the oxygen. There is CO2 released during their decomposition, but a large majority of the carbon stays in the plant material and after quite a bit of time, heat and pressure, is combined with hydrogen into complex chains (hydrocarbons) which become the fossil fuels we use. So trues might not be the only answer, but increased vegetation and longer growing seasons are good things and do help. It is a complex system and this article only scratches the surface lightly.
January 4th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
The overly-sensational title and poor writing quality of this article detracts from what appears to be a reasonable argument.
January 4th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
but trees also produce CO2 in the night, therefor all the co2 they used during the day would be produced in the night again. Trees are not the answer! We should invent some kind of machine that would take in C02 and convert it into oxygen or combine other elements to even produce other matter such as fuel and such. These machines should be power by solar or nuclear or any other clean energy source. Also they should be placed in strategic locations across the globe and monitored consistently. the machines should also be run on Linux.
January 4th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Within our means, I believe that we should all do what we can to decrease global warming; however, let us not forget that global warming has increased more because of natural causes rather than by human negligence like CFC’s (Chlorofluorocarbons), etc. One example of the natural causes is the explosion of Mount Penitubo, which was the second largest terrestrial eruption of the 20th century. It resulted in the leading cause of global warming.
January 4th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
As we all know plants are known for there capacity to absorb CO2 from the air and release oxygen that’s during the day and it they do the opposite at night. Due to the global warming the ability of the plants to do that is getting weaker.
June 7th, 2008 at 6:04 am
That is fantastic!