4 ms·
Some deserts are quite natural. It doesn't matter what you do to them short of knocking down the mountains upwind of them, they're going to be deserts. Some ar
by jerf 7y ago
Some deserts are quite natural. It doesn't matter what you do to them short of knocking down the mountains upwind of them, they're going to be deserts.
Some are not.
I consult my mental image of deserts and I observe that the Sahara is almost devoid of life, whereas the deserts of the American Southwest are rich and diverse despite their lack of substantial rainfall. (The latter I've also visited and spent some time in. I've never been to the Sahara to know if that's correct.) If my mental image is accurate, fixing the unnatural, almost entirely uninhabited desert would be nothing but a win. "Fixing" the natural kind would be relatively destructive of an existing ecosystem.
(Then you get into the question of "how do you valuate and compare two different ecosystems?". I've thrown that gauntlet a couple of times and I don't think I've even seen anyone engage with that question properly in a non-knee-jerk way. The heuristics people have been taught to use about environmentalism do not admit of that question even existing.)
- toss1 7y agoAlso note that some deserts are variable, and human activity can tip the balance [1]. especially considering the global carbon balance, it seems that tipping some parts of the desert back to forest would be a net plus. Humans are already doing massive uncontrolled experiments with bad results, it may help some to do some deliberate experiments with good foundations with the goal of creating good results? [1] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-really-turned-sahara-desert-green-oasis-wasteland-180962668/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-really-tu...