5 ms·

This is extremely obvious and it's surprising how long it took for this to be noticed. If you clear a section of a forest, the area becomes as hot as a desert b

by wlib 8y ago

This is extremely obvious and it's surprising how long it took for this to be noticed. If you clear a section of a forest, the area becomes as hot as a desert because of the lack of shade. This is a "microclimate". The more area you clear, the larger this hot microclimate becomes. This is the reason why there is desertification all over the globe. Whether you believe it or not, it is just as easy to create a desert from a forest as it is to do the reverse [1], it can even be a passive process [2]. Deserts rain occasionally, and when they do, it becomes a flash flood. If you tame the flash flood [3][5], you can change deserts. There are projects that do this and have proven its effectiveness, while also being able to solve the water crisis in arid lands in Africa [6]. Trees are incredibly important not necessarily for their reduction of carbon dioxide, but because of the microclimate each tree creates. They filter harsh light for the undergrowth, they cool the general area, and they transpire around 99% of the water they get, leading to more clouds and then more precipitation in other areas [4]. The reason why projects like this aren't so popular and aren't subsidized is not because they aren't effective, but because it is hard to make money from actually saving the environment. [1] https://youtu.be/3RqsUD6fyGk https://youtu.be/3RqsUD6fyGk [2]https://youtu.be/ZSPkcpGmflE https://youtu.be/ZSPkcpGmflE [3] https://youtu.be/zqKaRg3GTqg https://youtu.be/zqKaRg3GTqg [4] https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/08/trees-amazon-make-their-own-rain https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/08/trees-amazon-make-th... [5] https://youtu.be/_4oKKs8FfI0 https://youtu.be/_4oKKs8FfI0 [6] https://thewaterproject.org/sand-dams https://thewaterproject.org/sand-dams

rapnie 8y ago
> The reason why projects like this aren't so popular and aren't subsidized is not because they aren't effective, but because it is hard to make money from actually saving the environment. This. I've been hearing for 30 years how important trees are, and that we should plant way more of them. It is just not happening in any significant way. Politician's talk. Makes me feel old and tired, when I keep reading this same conclusion over and over, and "We should take action now", but nothing much happens on the action side.
- wlib 8y ago
  This dynamic could change if previously arid land can be put to agricultural or residential use. But that requires a lot of initial investment. The first step I think is to convince people that the problem can be fixed - and be profitable at the same time.
  - FooHentai 8y ago
    >and be profitable at the same time. It seems unlikely that it will be.
  - dbcurtis 8y ago
    So I grew up in fly-over land. That part of the USA where in Daniel Boone's time "A squirrel could go from the Atlantic Ocean to the Mississippi River without ever touching the ground.", but today is horizon-to-horizon corn and soybeans. Today, we make price-support payments to farmers if grain prices drop below the support trigger. We require corn-derived ethanol in gasoline even though the energy economics of it make no sense. It's mildly nuts. Let's just put some of that land back to trees. I mean really, instead of paying people to grow an over-abundance of feed grains, pay them to grow organic carbon sequestration units.
    - mulmen 8y ago
      I am from a rural area of the country and paid for college in part by working for a farmer up to and during wheat harvest for several years. I completely agree with you. America's fetish with the preservation of small family farms is incredibly destructive both environmentally and economically. People seem to have this romanticized concept of farmers as Ma and Pa working hard every day just to scrape by and raise their 6 kids. In reality these are businesses with massive amounts of capital tied up in businesses that are only sustainable with government subsidy. Let these businesses fail, create economic incentives to use the land for more productive purposes like carbon sequestration.
      - AngryData 8y ago
so_tired 8y ago
> If you tame the flash flood [3][5], you can change deserts This is very hyperbolic. Yes it is helpful but desert are deserts. Californians have been planting and watering huge in-land areas for decades. All these areas have reverted to pure desert every time there is a drought and water quotas. Reforestation (and saving the rain forests) are x10 easier and cheaper in rainy regions !!!
- wlib 8y ago
  Did you see [1]?
- DoreenMichele 8y ago
  This seems to work, from what I gather: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17931839 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17931839
davidp 8y ago
This is not intended to contradict your point, but the first video is an obvious marketing fluff piece almost certainly funded by the Chinese government (China Daily is not an independent news source). It is designed to manipulate foreign opinion in favor of China and distract from their pollution problem. The video does not represent scientifically persuasive evidence in favor of your point. "As we get closer, I can feel the temperature change. Here it's not just cool, it's actually a little cold." Well no shit; those mountains you're strolling through peak at 7000 feet and higher [0]. [0] http://en-gb.topographic-map.com/places/Hebei-7042315/ http://en-gb.topographic-map.com/places/Hebei-7042315/
- wlib 8y ago
  Yes, I realize that it is obviously Chinese propaganda, but I used it to show that deserts are entirely reversible. You are right that the altitude definitely has a cooling effect, but it also doesn't change the fact that the trees stabilized a desert into a forest.
  - marcus_holmes 8y ago
    "desert" has nothing to do with temperature. Deserts are areas of extremely low rainfall. Antarctica is a desert. /pedant
NeedMoreTea 8y ago
We used to know this. Almost every road and housing development included parks, verges and trees, enough to influence the micro climate. Roads and rail often had more space for greenery than purpose. There used to be enough of the natural environment left that you still knew where you were. Parks were more arboretum and public garden than the lowest maintenance acres of grass they have tended to become today. Post war became concrete and optimisation of how many plots you could pack in. First things to go were anything green. The temperature difference between the two approaches is easily noticeable. UK railways and towns are still reducing the amount of trees - mainly to eliminate the need to send some contractors out occasionally to tend to trees and bushes. It's yet another case of humanity sawing the branch they're sitting on for $2 more. The silliest part is the older developments, even former public social housing, are now often the valuable areas as they are nicer to live in.
- mc32 8y ago
  Much maligned Robert Moses, of urban blight fame, was a proponent and fan of "parkways" around the post war period. So much so he built 450 miles of parkways in NYC surrounds. Nowadays people blast him for razing neighborhoods to build roads, bridges, parks, schools and other infrastructure the city needed. It surely could have been done better --but it was also necessary to build, given the growth.
  - drb91 8y ago
    It’s easy to see things as necessary in retrospect. Things are rarely necessary, except to a specific end. Maybe you just lack imagination!
geowwy 8y ago
Israel has also been very successful at reforesting their land. You can see the borders of Israel by looking at where green stops on satellite images. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Satellite_image_of_Israel.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Satellite_image_of_I...
vitro 8y ago
There was also an experiment with dumping tonnes of orange peels on the land [1] and it went surprisingly well. [1] https://www.sciencealert.com/how-12-000-tonnes-of-dumped-orange-peel-produced-something-nobody-imagined https://www.sciencealert.com/how-12-000-tonnes-of-dumped-ora...

by wlib 8y ago

rapnie 8y ago

> The reason why projects like this aren't so popular and aren't subsidized is not because they aren't effective, but because it is hard to make money from actually saving the environment. This. I've been hearing for 30 years how important trees are, and that we should plant way more of them. It is just not happening in any significant way. Politician's talk. Makes me feel old and tired, when I keep reading this same conclusion over and over, and "We should take action now", but nothing much happens on the action side.

wlib 8y ago
This dynamic could change if previously arid land can be put to agricultural or residential use. But that requires a lot of initial investment. The first step I think is to convince people that the problem can be fixed - and be profitable at the same time.
- FooHentai 8y ago
  >and be profitable at the same time. It seems unlikely that it will be.
- dbcurtis 8y ago
  So I grew up in fly-over land. That part of the USA where in Daniel Boone's time "A squirrel could go from the Atlantic Ocean to the Mississippi River without ever touching the ground.", but today is horizon-to-horizon corn and soybeans. Today, we make price-support payments to farmers if grain prices drop below the support trigger. We require corn-derived ethanol in gasoline even though the energy economics of it make no sense. It's mildly nuts. Let's just put some of that land back to trees. I mean really, instead of paying people to grow an over-abundance of feed grains, pay them to grow organic carbon sequestration units.
  - mulmen 8y ago
    I am from a rural area of the country and paid for college in part by working for a farmer up to and during wheat harvest for several years. I completely agree with you. America's fetish with the preservation of small family farms is incredibly destructive both environmentally and economically. People seem to have this romanticized concept of farmers as Ma and Pa working hard every day just to scrape by and raise their 6 kids. In reality these are businesses with massive amounts of capital tied up in businesses that are only sustainable with government subsidy. Let these businesses fail, create economic incentives to use the land for more productive purposes like carbon sequestration.
    - AngryData 8y ago

so_tired 8y ago

> If you tame the flash flood [3][5], you can change deserts This is very hyperbolic. Yes it is helpful but desert are deserts. Californians have been planting and watering huge in-land areas for decades. All these areas have reverted to pure desert every time there is a drought and water quotas. Reforestation (and saving the rain forests) are x10 easier and cheaper in rainy regions !!!

wlib 8y ago
Did you see [1]?
DoreenMichele 8y ago
This seems to work, from what I gather: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17931839 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17931839

davidp 8y ago

This is not intended to contradict your point, but the first video is an obvious marketing fluff piece almost certainly funded by the Chinese government (China Daily is not an independent news source). It is designed to manipulate foreign opinion in favor of China and distract from their pollution problem. The video does not represent scientifically persuasive evidence in favor of your point. "As we get closer, I can feel the temperature change. Here it's not just cool, it's actually a little cold." Well no shit; those mountains you're strolling through peak at 7000 feet and higher [0]. [0] http://en-gb.topographic-map.com/places/Hebei-7042315/ http://en-gb.topographic-map.com/places/Hebei-7042315/

wlib 8y ago
Yes, I realize that it is obviously Chinese propaganda, but I used it to show that deserts are entirely reversible. You are right that the altitude definitely has a cooling effect, but it also doesn't change the fact that the trees stabilized a desert into a forest.
- marcus_holmes 8y ago
  "desert" has nothing to do with temperature. Deserts are areas of extremely low rainfall. Antarctica is a desert. /pedant

NeedMoreTea 8y ago

We used to know this. Almost every road and housing development included parks, verges and trees, enough to influence the micro climate. Roads and rail often had more space for greenery than purpose. There used to be enough of the natural environment left that you still knew where you were. Parks were more arboretum and public garden than the lowest maintenance acres of grass they have tended to become today. Post war became concrete and optimisation of how many plots you could pack in. First things to go were anything green. The temperature difference between the two approaches is easily noticeable. UK railways and towns are still reducing the amount of trees - mainly to eliminate the need to send some contractors out occasionally to tend to trees and bushes. It's yet another case of humanity sawing the branch they're sitting on for $2 more. The silliest part is the older developments, even former public social housing, are now often the valuable areas as they are nicer to live in.

mc32 8y ago
Much maligned Robert Moses, of urban blight fame, was a proponent and fan of "parkways" around the post war period. So much so he built 450 miles of parkways in NYC surrounds. Nowadays people blast him for razing neighborhoods to build roads, bridges, parks, schools and other infrastructure the city needed. It surely could have been done better --but it was also necessary to build, given the growth.
- drb91 8y ago
  It’s easy to see things as necessary in retrospect. Things are rarely necessary, except to a specific end. Maybe you just lack imagination!

geowwy 8y ago

Israel has also been very successful at reforesting their land. You can see the borders of Israel by looking at where green stops on satellite images. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Satellite_image_of_Israel.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Satellite_image_of_I...

vitro 8y ago

There was also an experiment with dumping tonnes of orange peels on the land [1] and it went surprisingly well. [1] https://www.sciencealert.com/how-12-000-tonnes-of-dumped-orange-peel-produced-something-nobody-imagined https://www.sciencealert.com/how-12-000-tonnes-of-dumped-ora...