5 ms·
NASA Feb 2019 The world is literally a greener place than it was 20 years ago, and data from NASA satellites has revealed a counterintuitive source for much of
by achow 3y ago
NASA Feb 2019
The world is literally a greener place than it was 20 years ago, and data from NASA satellites has revealed a counterintuitive source for much of this new foliage: China and India. A new study shows that the two emerging countries with the world’s biggest populations are leading the increase in greening on land. The effect stems mainly from ambitious tree planting programs in China and intensive agriculture in both countries.
https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/ames/human-activity-in-china-and-india-dominates-the-greening-of-earth-nasa-study-shows/ https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/ames/human-activ...
- jmartrican 3y agoWho is correct?
- HPsquared 3y agoCorollary: Is their correctness mutually exclusive?
- relaxing 3y agoUnfortunately this Nature article (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0220-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0220-7 ) is behind a paywall, but the NASA summary implies they measured "leaf area". The Science article (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aax1396 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aax1396 ) claims Leaf Area Index (same or different measure than the Nature study?) "exhibited a transition from increasing trends before the late 1990s to decreasing trends afterward". So at first blush yes, but the details will doubtlessly prove otherwise. If anyone has an institutional login and can post a pdf, please do.
- ylere 3y agohttps://sci-hub.se/https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0220-7 https://sci-hub.se/https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-01...
- relaxing 3y agoThank you. So. Science Paper (SP) uses data from 2 spaceborne sensors, MODIS and AVHRR. Nature Paper (NP) uses data from AVHRR alongside 3 other metrics: GLASS, GLOBMAP, and TCDR, all of which claim to be fusions of the same data from MODIS and AVHRR. (https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/8/3/263 https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/8/3/263 ... https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2012JG002084 https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/201... ... https://zenodo.org/records/4700264 https://zenodo.org/records/4700264 ) NP supplementals show the data from AVHRR does trend upwards to the present data (agreeing with SP), but the other 3 metrics are trending flat (GLASS, TCDR) or downward (GLOBMAP). I have neither the expertise nor inclination to delve further into the various methodologies of creating these various Leaf Area Indices.
- itishappy 3y agoFull text available for free here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6376198/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6376198/
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- NoMoreNicksLeft 3y agoWhich will persuade people to believe in the correct narrative, and to disbelieve in the incorrect narrative?
- rjbwork 3y agoWhat is the correct narrative? What is the incorrect narrative?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- pphysch 3y ago> data from NASA satellites has revealed a counterintuitive source for much of this new foliage: China and India. The totally unnecessary framing with "counterintuitive" here reveals much about the epistemological crisis of the West. Poor, developing countries are only allowed to care about the environment insofar as it kneecaps their development and economic growth.
- lovich 3y agoIs it an “epistemological crisis” to expect other human civilizations to act like we did? The west didn’t have an eye towards environmental health while we rapidly industrialized, I don’t think it’s a negative to be surprised that these countries are seemingly doing better than we did on this one metric. Personally my response upon reading that line was “kudos to them”
- philipov 3y agoIt's not an epistemological crisis, but it does expose a blind-spot in not understanding the principle of Uneven and Combined Development (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uneven_and_combined_development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uneven_and_combined_developmen...). It assumes the conditions are the same in both cases, but they very much are not. I would not expect people to act the same way in the face of radically different developmental circumstances. And the circumstances of a country rapidly industrializing today are radically different than of those during the first period of rapid industrialization. The incentives/pressures, demographics, technology, geopolitical landscape, and resources available to newly industrializing countries are all completely different.
- pphysch 3y ago> Is it an “epistemological crisis” to expect other human civilizations to act like we did? Yes, absolutely. Incuriosity and chauvinism towards non-Western civilizations, in the face of overwhelming evidence, is at the root of this crisis.
- itishappy 3y agoYou may be reading a bit too much into this. It's counterintuitive specifically because the results are a byproduct of their economic growth, and not due to environmental policy.
- bmitc 3y agoDoes tree planting make an area greener? How is greener measured? Planting trees just to cut them down for lumber doesn't seem very green in that typical sense. And treating agricultural areas as green doesn't seem accurate either. Agricultural plots decimate the local ecosystem. So maybe a picture of the rectangle from above is literally green, but is it really green in the sense of it promoting healthy ecosystems?
- hutzlibu 3y ago"Does tree planting make an area greener? " In general, yes. "Planting trees just to cut them down for lumber doesn't seem very green in that typical sense." If it is done in a sustainable way, then also yes. Also chinas main motivation is actually to stop the desertification, so they want most the trees to stay. "Agricultural plots decimate the local ecosystem" Also depends. If you bring in irrigation, then you can have green, where there would be none before (but you can have all sorts of other trouble, if your water consumption is not sustainable). So all in all, a true wilderness with old forest is surely way more beautiful and a way more valuable ecosystem, but even a forest plantation is way greener than a arid wasteland.
- nonameiguess 3y agoThey mean greener quite literally. Satellite imagery is spectrally analyzed and more of the light reflected from the earth's surface is in a frequency range considered "green." It doesn't mean ecologically friendly. Replacing rainforest with oil palm monoculture is extremely destructive ecologically, but oil palms are just as green as any other tree. Also, if they're analyzing water color as well, large-scale algal blooms can conceivably result in a greener surface, but they're a pretty bad thing because they suck up too much oxygen too quickly out of the water and kill everything else.
- cbeach 3y agoPlanting trees and cutting them down is a very effective form of carbon capture (provided the felled trees aren’t burnt) A tree’s dry weight is 50% carbon, captured from the atmosphere. Over a 100 year period, one tree absorbs a tonne of CO2
- drekipus 3y agoChina literally paints their mountains green. (Source: guy who lived in china for 12 years and did a travel documentary.then was forced out by government, now has contacts all around China) https://youtu.be/Cvc7VymDa4c?si=xIcqLGiIC9gNTd7Y https://youtu.be/Cvc7VymDa4c?si=xIcqLGiIC9gNTd7Y
- mardifoufs 3y agoI don't think NASA measures the leaf area by literally just looking at the color of the land it is surveying.
- patmorgan23 3y agoI mean they might literally do that with satellite imagery. How do you think they do it?
- jcbe 3y agoThey use the difference between measured red and infrared light divided by the sum of measured red and infrared light https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalized_difference_vegetation_index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalized_difference_vegetati...
- motbus3 3y agoI've read it and it states it is not an useful metric and, please correct me if I'm wrong, does not say anything about measuring fake plants. As far as I understood, it does use the reflectance in red and infra red to detect soil, water and vegetation, but it was not designed to detect fake green plastic from plants anyway. I mean, who would think someone would use fake grass and fake plants and also use paint in mountains. It is so stupid that no one would even think in measuring it.
- relaxing 3y agoPlastic doesn't look like foliage under NIR.