3 ms·
Scientists Were Wrong: Plants Absorb 31% More CO2 Than Previously Thought
- allears 2y agoWell that's great, but still the atmospheric CO2 not only keeps increasing, but at an accelerating rate. I guess the plants won't save us.
- Terr_ 2y agoAnalogy: The faucet is pouring water in faster than it can leave via the drain, but I'm sure we can keep the water level from getting too high by dumping in dry sponges every year, forever.
- riedel 2y agoI read the headline the other way around. I rather see a huge risk of loosing part of this sink which immense effects. The world has been a rough equilibrium for a long time. Majorly messing it up in roughly 100yrs was probably not a good idea independent of the different weights on the positive sides.
- sieabahlpark 2y ago[dead]
- bryant 2y agoriedel (deeper in the comments) is interpreting the headline correctly - if plants absorb 31% more CO2 than previously thought, then it means that their destruction is even worse for CO2 levels than previously believed. We're not planting more than we're destroying. If we were, this would be great news. But since we're not, this is terrible news.
- credit_guy 2y ago> We're not planting more than we're destroying That is not entirely certain. According to the Global Forest Watch [1]: > In 2010, the world had 3.92 Gha of tree cover, extending over 30% of its land area. In 2023, it lost 28.3 Mha of tree cover. A loss of 0.7% in 13 years. That might sound bad, but my feeling is that this is well below the level of measurement accuracy. [1] https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/global/?category=land-cover&location=WyJnbG9iYWwiXQ%3D%3D https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/global/?categor...
- blargey 2y agoThe 28.3 Mha loss you quoted is for the single year of 2023, not over 13 years. The sum of yearly losses for (2010, 2023] is 315.2 Mha according to that website. So about 8.0%, not 0.7%.
- Ancalagon 2y agoOof significantly worse
- credit_guy 2y agoFair enough, it was for one year, my bad. Here's for 20 years (at the bottom of the page): > From 2000 to 2020, the world experienced a net change of -101 Mha (-2.4%) in tree cover.
- throwaway4220 2y agoWhy start with “scientists were wrong”
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- nitwit005 2y agoTo get clicks from people annoyed at the headline.
- z3ncyberpunk 2y agoBecause their constant stream of disinformation should be shamed
- profmarshmellow 2y agoHa doesin't matter, they want us to stop eating meat and will find another reason
- ConspiracyFact 2y agoWho are "they" and why do "they" care if we eat meat? And what evidence do you have, anyway?
- know-how 2y ago[dead]
- profmarshmellow 2y ago[dead]
- mint2 2y agoThose are wild conspiracy theories. This should be a wake up call.