3 ms·
One thing not noted in the article is how the albedo reduction from greening in the arctic affects warming, ice melt, etc. It is good that greening has a negati
by darkstarsys 5y ago
One thing not noted in the article is how the albedo reduction from greening in the arctic affects warming, ice melt, etc. It is good that greening has a negative feedback effect, but albedo reduction likely reduces that benefit in those regions.
- datameta 5y agoGreenery vs snow, yes. But vs brown earth? No. Is it also possible that plants can effectively slow down the heat transfer to permafrost, at least when that shade is sorely needed during atypical heat waves?
- sampo 5y agoThere is also a possibility of more vegetation in the arctic → more BVOC (biogenic volatile organic compounds) emissions from the vegetation → more aerosols → more clouds, which could increase the albedo (albedo as seen from space) and thus reduce warming. But these interactions are not very well know currently.
- marcus_holmes 5y agoWasn't there a thing where more green cover = more clouds, because the greenery kept surface water from being absorbed into the soil (and therefore unavailable for evaporation and cloud formation)? I seem to remember reading about that. And, obviously, more clouds = higher albedo. Though water vapour itself is a very strong greenhouse gas, so the net effect is tricky to predict.