Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Global Forest Watch  (Read 40269 times)

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #100 on: January 06, 2017, 04:32:06 PM »
Wilcox, B. P., S. Bruijnzeel, and H. Asbjornsen (2016), The pace of change on tropical landscapes, Eos, 97, doi:10.1029/2016EO063837. Published on 30 December 2016.

https://eos.org/meeting-reports/the-pace-of-change-on-tropical-landscapes?utm_source=eos&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EosBuzz010617

Extract: "… the dual processes of climate change and deforestation are driving rapid changes in tropical landscapes. The effects of these changes on water and biogeochemical processes, at a range of scales, are enormous but poorly understood. Scientists do know, for example, that deforestation leads to changes in evapotranspiration, streamflow, and precipitation on local to regional scales and may even influence global climates. Similarly, climate change will likely lead to large-scale and important changes in cloud and precipitation dynamics, feedbacks between the atmosphere and vegetation, and hydrologic cycles in the tropics."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #101 on: January 15, 2017, 06:22:18 PM »
The linked article is entitled: "Ecuador has begun drilling for oil in the world's richest rainforest".  Need I say more?

http://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/1/14/14265958/ecuador-drilling-oil-rainforest

“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 899
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #102 on: January 15, 2017, 06:44:01 PM »
The linked article is entitled: "Ecuador has begun drilling for oil in the world's richest rainforest".  Need I say more?

http://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/1/14/14265958/ecuador-drilling-oil-rainforest

The world developed countries should be paying countries like Ecuador to keep the rainforests pristine... They don't want to be poor. How else can tthey do ?
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #103 on: January 24, 2017, 06:13:48 PM »
The linked article is entitled: "We are destroying rainforests so quickly they may be gone in 100 years".  Will the world allow the current high rate of deforestation to continue, or will it take effective action?

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2017/jan/23/destroying-rainforests-quickly-gone-100-years-deforestation

Extract: "Rich countries pledged at Paris to raise $100bn a year to help poor countries reduce their emissions. Some of that money should go to tropical forest protection.
 
In addition, a new UN-backed mechanism called Redd (reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation) has been initiated that involves rich countries paying countries to protect forests and the carbon stored within them. Tropical and sub-tropical countries could receive both public and private funding if they succeed in reducing their emissions from deforestation. But this is deeply controversial as global schemes are prone to corruption, difficult to implement and hard to measure.

If there is money to protect forests, will it go to big companies as subsidy, or lead to evictions of people and human rights abuses?

There must be safeguards, but Germany, Norway and the UK have together promised up to $1bn a year for Redd schemes until 2020. The World Bank plans to contribute a similar amount to work with African countries. A further fund is intended to benefit indigenous and other forest communities which have been the traditional protectors of the forest.

Until Paris, stopping tropical deforestation was at best unlikely and probably impossible. It remains very difficult, but a political and financial mechanism has now been created to incentivise countries, companies and communities to do so at a fraction of the cost of reducing comparable emissions in the US or Europe. Protecting the forests now depends on rich governments not ducking their responsibilities and playing their part."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #104 on: February 07, 2017, 11:33:55 PM »
The linked article entitled: "Risk of ‘megafires’ to increase as climate warms", cites peer reviewed research published in 'Nature Ecology & Evolution' that climate change will increase the frequency of extreme wildfires:

https://www.carbonbrief.org/risk-megafires-increase-climate-warms
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #105 on: February 23, 2017, 11:46:01 PM »
The linked article is entitle: "Small farmers play big role in felling Peru rainforest - satellite maps".  It is going to be difficult to stop small/poor indigenous farmers from slowly destroying the Peruvian rainforest.

http://news.trust.org/item/20170222172928-jnarz

Extract: "Small producers clearing forests have caused Peru to lose 1,800,000 hectares of Amazon rainforest since 2001.

Deforestation in the Peruvian Amazon has risen this century - destroying an area of rainforest 14 times larger than Los Angeles - with small farmers behind most of the cutting, according to a new analysis of satellite maps.

Small farmers account for about 80 percent of Peru's forest loss, the Monitoring of the Andean Amazon Project (MAAP), a Washington, D.C.-based research group, said on Wednesday."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #106 on: February 25, 2017, 08:40:27 PM »
The linked article is entitled: "Protected areas found to be ‘significant’ sources of carbon emissions", & is indicates that merely designating tropical rainforests as 'protected' does not stop deforestation and the associated net GHG emissions.

https://news.mongabay.com/2017/02/protected-areas-found-to-be-significant-sources-of-carbon-emissions/

Extract: "•    The researchers found 2,018 protected areas across the tropics store nearly 15 percent of all tropical forest carbon. This is because protected areas tend to have denser, older forest – thus, higher carbon stocks.
•   Their study uncovered that, on average, nearly 0.2 percent of protected area forest cover was razed per year between 2000 and 2012.
•   Less than nine percent of the reserves that the researchers sampled contributed 80 percent of the total carbon emissions between 2000 and 2012, putting this small subset of reserves on par with the UK’s entire transportation sector.
•   The researchers say their findings could help prioritize conservation attention."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #107 on: February 25, 2017, 08:51:58 PM »
The linked article is entitled: "Amazon Deforestation, Once Tamed, Comes Roaring Back".  Policymakers are taking credit for stopping Amazon deforestation, but reality is much different than their "alternate facts".

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/24/business/energy-environment/deforestation-brazil-bolivia-south-america.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

Extract: "A decade after the “Save the Rainforest” movement captured the world’s imagination, Cargill and other food giants are pushing deeper into the wilderness."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Monty

  • NewMembers
  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #108 on: April 27, 2017, 08:50:00 AM »
How Sahara Dust Sustains the Amazon Rainforest, in 3-D
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/sahara-dust-amazon-rainforest-nasa-18708



How interesting, thanks for sharing the video.

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #109 on: May 03, 2017, 04:54:43 PM »
The linked reference indicates that wildfires in Borneo are ten time more larger during droughts than in non-drought years, & that global warming will increase the frequency & severity of such droughts:

Muh Taufik et al. Amplification of wildfire area burnt by hydrological drought in the humid tropics, Nature Climate Change (2017). DOI: 10.1038/nclimate3280

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate3280.html

Abstract: "Borneo’s diverse ecosystems, which are typical humid tropical conditions, are deteriorating rapidly, as the area is experiencing recurrent large-scale wildfires, affecting atmospheric composition and influencing regional climate processes. Studies suggest that climate-driven drought regulates wildfires, but these overlook subsurface processes leading to hydrological drought, an important driver. Here, we show that models which include hydrological processes better predict area burnt than those solely based on climate data. We report that the Borneo landscape has experienced a substantial hydrological drying trend since the early twentieth century, leading to progressive tree mortality, more severe than in other tropical regions. This has caused massive wildfires in lowland Borneo during the past two decades, which we show are clustered in years with large areas of hydrological drought coinciding with strong El Niño events. Statistical modelling evidence shows amplifying wildfires and greater area burnt in response to El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) strength, when hydrology is considered. These results highlight the importance of considering hydrological drought for wildfire prediction, and we recommend that hydrology should be considered in future studies of the impact of projected ENSO strength, including effects on tropical ecosystems, and biodiversity conservation."

See also, the associated linked article entitled: "Hydrological drought amplifies wildfires in Borneo's humid tropics".

https://phys.org/news/2017-05-hydrological-drought-amplifies-wildfires-borneo.html

Extract: "The area of wildfires in Borneo during drought years turns out to be ten times larger than during non-drought years, an international research team reports in Nature Climate Change of this week. The fires recurrently affecting Borneo's humid tropical ecosystems have negative influence on the biodiversity and lead to large CO2 emissions, affecting atmospheric composition and regional climate processes. Future droughts in wet tropical regions will likely increase in frequency and severity, and consequently the fire risk, the team says. "
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #110 on: May 03, 2017, 05:17:35 PM »
I think that the following reference errs on the side of least drama, but nevertheless, finds that on average climate change will disrupt forest ecosystems.

Xiang Song, Xiaodong Zeng (2017), "Evaluating the responses of forest ecosystems to climate change and CO2 using dynamic global vegetation models", Ecology and Evolution, 7 (3): 997-1008

Abstract: "The climate has important influences on the distribution and structure of forest ecosystems, which may lead to vital feedback to climate change. However, much of the existing work focuses on the changes in carbon fluxes or water cycles due to climate change and/or atmospheric CO 2, and few studies have considered how and to what extent climate change and CO 2 influence the ecosystem structure (e.g., fractional coverage change) and the changes in the responses of ecosystems with different characteristics. In this work, two dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs): IAP-DGVM coupled with CLM3 and CLM4-CNDV, were used to investigate the response of the forest ecosystem structure to changes in climate (temperature and precipitation) and CO 2 concentration. In the temperature sensitivity tests, warming reduced the global area-averaged ecosystem gross primary production in the two models, which decreased global forest area. Furthermore, the changes in tree fractional coverage (ΔFtree; %) from the two models were sensitive to the regional temperature and ecosystem structure, i.e., the mean annual temperature (MAT; °C) largely determined whether ΔFtree was positive or negative, while the tree fractional coverage (Ftree; %) played a decisive role in the amplitude of ΔFtree around the globe, and the dependence was more remarkable in IAP-DGVM. In cases with precipitation change, Ftree had a uniformly positive relationship with precipitation, especially in the transition zones of forests (30% < Ftree < 60%) for IAP-DGVM and in semiarid and arid regions for CLM4-CNDV. Moreover, ΔFtree had a stronger dependence on Ftree than on the mean annual precipitation (MAP; mm/year). It was also demonstrated that both models captured the fertilization effects of the CO 2 concentration."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #111 on: June 06, 2017, 03:40:21 PM »
The linked article indicates that fire could transform the Amazon forests this century

Le Page, Y., Morton, D., Corinne, H., Ben, B.-L., Cardoso Pereira, J. M., Hurtt, G., and Asrar, G.: Synergy between land use and climate change increases future fire risk in Amazon forests, Earth Syst. Dynam. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-2017-55, in review, 2017.

http://www.earth-syst-dynam-discuss.net/esd-2017-55/

Abstract. Tropical forests have been a permanent feature of the Amazon basin for at least 55 million years, yet climate change and land use threaten the forest's future over the next century. Understory forest fires, common under current climate in frontier forests, may accelerate Amazon forest losses from climate-driven dieback and deforestation. Far from land use frontiers, scarce fire ignitions and high moisture levels preclude significant burning, yet projected climate and land use changes may increase fire activity in these remote regions. Here, we used a fire model specifically parameterized for Amazon understory fires to examine the interactions between anthropogenic activities and climate under current and projected conditions. In a scenario of low mitigation efforts with substantial land use expansion and climate change – the representative concentration pathway (RCP) 8.5 – projected understory fires increase in frequency and duration, burning 4–28 times more forest in 2080–2100 than during 1990–2010. In contrast, active climate mitigation and land use contraction in RCP4.5 constrain the projected increase in fire activity to 0.9–5.4 times contemporary burned area. Importantly, if climate mitigation is not successful, land use contraction alone is very effective under low to moderate climate change, but does little to reduce fire activity under the most severe climate projections. These results underscore the potential for a fire-driven transformation of Amazon forests if recent regional policies for forest conservation are not paired with global efforts to mitigate climate change.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #112 on: June 07, 2017, 07:53:39 PM »
The linked reference indicates that coniferous & boreal biome forests are particularly sensitive to future climate change

Rupert Seidl, et. al. (2017), "Forest disturbances under climate change", Nature Climate Change, Volume: 7, Pages: 395–402, doi:10.1038/nclimate3303

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v7/n6/full/nclimate3303.html

Abstract: "Forest disturbances are sensitive to climate. However, our understanding of disturbance dynamics in response to climatic changes remains incomplete, particularly regarding large-scale patterns, interaction effects and dampening feedbacks. Here we provide a global synthesis of climate change effects on important abiotic (fire, drought, wind, snow and ice) and biotic (insects and pathogens) disturbance agents. Warmer and drier conditions particularly facilitate fire, drought and insect disturbances, while warmer and wetter conditions increase disturbances from wind and pathogens. Widespread interactions between agents are likely to amplify disturbances, while indirect climate effects such as vegetation changes can dampen long-term disturbance sensitivities to climate. Future changes in disturbance are likely to be most pronounced in coniferous forests and the boreal biome. We conclude that both ecosystems and society should be prepared for an increasingly disturbed future of forests."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #113 on: June 19, 2017, 04:11:27 PM »
Relying on developing countries to safeguard tropical rainforest for the benefit of the world is not a very good bet:

"Brazil on verge of legitimizing Amazon land theft on a grand scale"

https://news.mongabay.com/2017/06/brazil-on-verge-of-legitimizing-amazon-land-theft-on-a-grand-scale/

Extract: "President Temer, serving the bancada ruralista rural lobby, is poised to turn over 600,000 hectares of federally protected Amazon forest to illegal miners, loggers and land thieves."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3625
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 360
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #114 on: June 19, 2017, 07:11:40 PM »
Logging is a rough business. Back in 1990 I wrote a report on some loging proposals for a Government. I was told that failure to change the recommendations would be fatal. Fortunately some Vietnam Vet drinking buddies showed the bad guys that their illegal weapons were bigger than the bad guy's illegal weapons.

For some time those drinking buddies had a great line of credit at our watering hole. It is as dangerous today as then.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #115 on: July 12, 2017, 11:26:43 PM »
Sad news from Columbia's rainforest:

Title: "Deforestation soars in Colombia after Farc rebels' demobilization"

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/11/colombia-deforestation-farc

Extract: "Colombia has seen an alarming surge in deforestation after the leftwing rebels relinquished control over vast areas of the country as a part of a historic peace deal.

The area of deforestation jumped 44% in 2016 to 178,597 hectares (690 sq miles) compared to the year before, according to official figures released this month – and most of the destruction was in remote rainforest areas once controlled by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc).

The rebel army was a violent illegal armed group, but for decades the guerrillas enforced strict limits on logging by civilians – in part to protect their cover from air raids by government warplanes."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6080
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 242
  • Likes Given: 173
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #116 on: August 23, 2017, 11:32:05 PM »
From another thread:

Maybe a stupid question. But if you look at the rainforest in Brasil. What would be the impact on rainfall by cutting it down. As far as i know a tree in the Amazon takes up somewhere between 1000 and 2000 liters of water a day. And most of that water falls back down as rain.  Mostly the vegatation has a top layer, a middle layer and a bottom layer in the Amazon. That means 1 are creates several 1000 liters of rain a day. Or do i see this wrong ? Lost year they cut 8000 square km of forest. If that water would fall on land as rain. That 8000 km of forest could provide 14000 square km of land with 1 qubic meter of water a year. Could this have a substantial impact, and on what kind of things will it have an impact ?
Compare, compare, compare

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3625
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 360
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #117 on: September 30, 2017, 02:58:57 PM »
Some grim reading.

Brazil's worst month ever for forest fires blamed on human activity

"September saw more fires than any month on record, as experts say uptick is due to expansion of agriculture and reduction of oversight and surveillance"
See:-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/28/brazil-forest-fires-deforestation-september-record-amazon

Alarm as study reveals world’s tropical forests are huge carbon emission source
Forests globally are so degraded that instead of absorbing emissions they now release more carbon annually than all the traffic in the US, say researchers
See:-
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/28/alarm-as-study-reveals-worlds-tropical-forests-are-huge-carbon-emission-source


One reads that human CO2 emissions were stable in 2017, and then one reads the above articles and tries not to despair.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #118 on: October 06, 2017, 04:35:13 PM »
The acceleration of anthropogenic deforestation is not limited to developing countries:

Title: "'Alarming' rise in Queensland tree clearing as 400,000 hectares stripped"

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/05/alarming-rise-in-queensland-tree-clearing-as-400000-hectares-stripped

Extract: "Figures released on Thursday showed a 33% rise in clearing to almost 400,000 hectares in 2015-16, meaning Queensland now has two-thirds the annual rate of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon."

See also:  "Queensland tree clearing wipes out federal emissions gains"

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/06/queensland-tree-clearing-wipes-out-federal-emissions-gains
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #119 on: November 30, 2017, 06:25:04 PM »
More sad news about recent deforestation trends:

Kemen G Austin, Mariano González-Roglich, Danica Schaffer-Smith, Amanda M Schwantes and Jennifer J Swenson (9 May 2017), "Trends in size of tropical deforestation events signal increasing dominance of industrial-scale drivers", Environmental Research Letters, Volume 12, Number 5 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa6a88

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa6a88#references

Abstract: "Deforestation continues across the tropics at alarming rates, with repercussions for ecosystem processes, carbon storage and long term sustainability. Taking advantage of recent fine-scale measurement of deforestation, this analysis aims to improve our understanding of the scale of deforestation drivers in the tropics. We examined trends in forest clearings of different sizes from 2000–2012 by country, region and development level. As tropical deforestation increased from approximately 6900 kha yr−1 in the first half of the study period, to >7900 kha yr−1 in the second half of the study period, >50% of this increase was attributable to the proliferation of medium and large clearings (>10 ha). This trend was most pronounced in Southeast Asia and in South America. Outside of Brazil >60% of the observed increase in deforestation in South America was due to an upsurge in medium- and large-scale clearings; Brazil had a divergent trend of decreasing deforestation, >90% of which was attributable to a reduction in medium and large clearings. The emerging prominence of large-scale drivers of forest loss in many regions and countries suggests the growing need for policy interventions which target industrial-scale agricultural commodity producers. The experience in Brazil suggests that there are promising policy solutions to mitigate large-scale deforestation, but that these policy initiatives do not adequately address small-scale drivers. By providing up-to-date and spatially explicit information on the scale of deforestation, and the trends in these patterns over time, this study contributes valuable information for monitoring, and designing effective interventions to address deforestation."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3625
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 360
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #120 on: March 05, 2018, 10:15:24 PM »
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/mar/05/global-deforestation-hotspot-3m-hectares-of-australian-forest-to-be-lost-in-15-years

A long read and infinitely depressing. And they call Australia "The Lucky Country"

'Global deforestation hotspot': 3m hectares of Australian forest to be lost in 15 years

Quote
“It has gotten so bad that WWF International put it on the list of global deforestation fronts, the only one in the developed world on that list,” says Martin Taylor, the protected areas and conservation science manager at WWF Australia.

In Queensland, where there is both the most clearing and the best data on clearing, trees are being bulldozed at a phenomenal rate.

About 395,000 hectares of native vegetation were cleared there in 2015-16, 33% more compared with the previous year. And despite the re-elected Labor government promising changes to rein it in, notifications of planned land clearing in Queensland have jumped a further 30%, suggesting woodlands could be bulldozed even faster in coming years.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

colchonero

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 0

Alexander555

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 643
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #122 on: March 10, 2018, 09:53:35 PM »
https://twitter.com/EcoSenseNow/status/972145504460029953

I don't know where this comes from, but over here they are building everywhere. And still it looks a lot greener now than in 1997 on the map. So i think it's a joke.

colchonero

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #123 on: March 10, 2018, 10:42:24 PM »
I don't know, I just saw it on twitter, that's why I didn't leave any comment below about it. I mean it's not a joke, I did a research, NASA has been tracking Earth's vegetation this way since September 1997 and has maps like these, I just don't know if the dates in this tweet are accurate or not because I couldn't find any on original NASA website to prove it.

Alexander555

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 643
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #124 on: March 10, 2018, 11:31:41 PM »
Maybe the vegetation is growing faster because of the extra co2. But probably there is less vegetation. It's hard to imagine there would be more. Over here they turn 12 footballfields of nature into concrete every day. And on the map it shows as green as a rainforest. So in general it tells very little about the condition we are in.

Alexander555

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 643
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #125 on: March 10, 2018, 11:55:32 PM »
In some way it even holds some kind of danger. Besides the fact that this vegetation growth tells us something about climate change. We add more co2, what is good for photosynthesis. And that is good for foodproduction. So the population keeps growing. The same time we exhaust our land, more and more places need fertiliser. Or they can not use the land every year, or at a much lower yield. The moment we start to add less co2, and we see the opposite happening, less vegetation growth. Our population will be bigger than ever, all land will depend on some kind of fertiliser. That will probably trigger more deforestation. Lost week i made a small seedbank for myself. Some corn , onion, carrots.... They stay good for 5 years on average, some a little less. In that case , small scale production could be part of a solution.

Daniel B.

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #126 on: March 13, 2018, 03:34:33 PM »
Research has shown that elevated CO2 levels increases photosynthesis and reduces water loss.  This effect is most pronounced in arid regions, like north Africa and Australia.

https://phys.org/news/2013-07-greening-co2.html

ghoti

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 756
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #127 on: March 13, 2018, 04:40:01 PM »
Research has shown that elevated CO2 levels increases photosynthesis and reduces water loss.  This effect is most pronounced in arid regions, like north Africa and Australia.

https://phys.org/news/2013-07-greening-co2.html
Much plant physiology research was done on this in the 1970s and plant ecophysiology research done on this in the 1980s. The effect of increasing CO2 on water use efficiency mostly pertains to plants with C3 photosynthesis (broad leaf plants) but has a much smaller impact on C4 photosynthesis (grains and grasses) because these plants chemically concentrate CO2 to feed photosynthesis. C4 plants are already much more water use efficient which is why they dominate arid zones. Succulents (CAM photosynthesis) concentrate CO2 separate from photosynthesis during the night when water loss is minimized.

So this generalized result is expected but is limited. The impact is not linear and does not continue to increase with ever increasing CO2 concentrations.

Daniel B.

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #128 on: March 13, 2018, 06:33:04 PM »
Research has shown that elevated CO2 levels increases photosynthesis and reduces water loss.  This effect is most pronounced in arid regions, like north Africa and Australia.

https://phys.org/news/2013-07-greening-co2.html
Much plant physiology research was done on this in the 1970s and plant ecophysiology research done on this in the 1980s. The effect of increasing CO2 on water use efficiency mostly pertains to plants with C3 photosynthesis (broad leaf plants) but has a much smaller impact on C4 photosynthesis (grains and grasses) because these plants chemically concentrate CO2 to feed photosynthesis. C4 plants are already much more water use efficient which is why they dominate arid zones. Succulents (CAM photosynthesis) concentrate CO2 separate from photosynthesis during the night when water loss is minimized.

So this generalized result is expected but is limited. The impact is not linear and does not continue to increase with ever increasing CO2 concentrations.

Considering that between 80 and 90% of the plants covering the surface of the planet are C3, that does not seem very limited. 

ghoti

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 756
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #129 on: March 13, 2018, 06:57:36 PM »
Much of our crops are C4. Maize photosynthesis increases max out at  400 ppm.

Too many things limit plant growth for increased CO2 to have a significant positive impact. The science has been done.

Daniel B.

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #130 on: March 13, 2018, 07:38:15 PM »
Much of our crops are C4. Maize photosynthesis increases max out at  400 ppm.

Too many things limit plant growth for increased CO2 to have a significant positive impact. The science has been done.

If CO2 is not responsible for the greening of our planet's surface (as claimed by the scientists at CSIRO), then what is causing the increase?

ghoti

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 756
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #131 on: March 14, 2018, 03:11:04 AM »
Much of our crops are C4. Maize photosynthesis increases max out at  400 ppm.

Too many things limit plant growth for increased CO2 to have a significant positive impact. The science has been done.

If CO2 is not responsible for the greening of our planet's surface (as claimed by the scientists at CSIRO), then what is causing the increase?
I'm not saying there isn't greening. I'm saying greening won't double if we further double CO2. The paper doesn't actually say it is the CO2. It points out the correlation and actually says there might be other factors such as weather changes - which is reasonable (and likely). It also indicates that greening isn't everywhere - also an indication that it isn't a direct CO2 effect though water use efficiency improvements due to higher CO2 are extremely likely. Again CO2 / water use efficency in non-linear and a decreasing function. (I got my PhD measuring this stuff).

Daniel B.

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #132 on: March 14, 2018, 11:39:46 AM »
Much of our crops are C4. Maize photosynthesis increases max out at  400 ppm.

Too many things limit plant growth for increased CO2 to have a significant positive impact. The science has been done.

If CO2 is not responsible for the greening of our planet's surface (as claimed by the scientists at CSIRO), then what is causing the increase?
I'm not saying there isn't greening. I'm saying greening won't double if we further double CO2. The paper doesn't actually say it is the CO2. It points out the correlation and actually says there might be other factors such as weather changes - which is reasonable (and likely). It also indicates that greening isn't everywhere - also an indication that it isn't a direct CO2 effect though water use efficiency improvements due to higher CO2 are extremely likely. Again CO2 / water use efficency in non-linear and a decreasing function. (I got my PhD measuring this stuff).

That I can agree with.  I thought you were discounting the CO2 effect altogether.  In general, the limiting factor is what controls plant growth.  I would contend that water is the main factor in  arid regions, and weather has the most influence.  In the absence of sufficient precipitation, CO2 can help enhance water uptake. 

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #133 on: March 21, 2018, 04:46:05 PM »
The linked reference focuses on the increase in carbon sequesterization associated with the increased growth rate for boreal trees due to changes in North Atlantic Ocean dynamics since 1980.  However, that leaves it up to reader to account for the associated accelerated decrease in local albedo associated with such boreal forest growth:

Clémentine Ols et al. (Post-1980 shifts in the sensitivity of boreal tree growth to North Atlantic Ocean dynamics and seasonal climate: Tree growth responses to North Atlantic Ocean dynamics", Global and Planetary Change, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2018.03.006

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818117302564

Abstract: "The mid-20th century changes in North Atlantic Ocean dynamics, e.g. slow-down of the Atlantic meridional overturning thermohaline circulation (AMOC), have been considered as early signs of tipping points in the Earth climate system. We hypothesized that these changes have significantly altered boreal forest growth dynamics in northeastern North America (NA) and northern Europe (NE), two areas geographically adjacent to the North Atlantic Ocean. To test our hypothesis, we investigated tree growth responses to seasonal large-scale oceanic and atmospheric indices (the AMOC, North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), and Arctic Oscillation (AO)) and climate (temperature and precipitation) from 1950 onwards, both at the regional and local levels. We developed a network of 6876 black spruce (NA) and 14,437 Norway spruce (NE) tree-ring width series, extracted from forest inventory databases. Analyses revealed post-1980 shifts from insignificant to significant tree growth responses to summer oceanic and atmospheric dynamics both in NA (negative responses to NAO and AO indices) and NE (positive response to NAO and AMOC indices). The strength and sign of these responses varied, however, through space with stronger responses in western and central boreal Quebec and in central and northern central Sweden and across scales with stronger responses at the regional level than at the local level. Emerging post-1980 associations with North Atlantic Ocean dynamics synchronized with stronger tree growth responses to local seasonal climate, particularly to winter temperatures. Our results suggest that ongoing and future anomalies in oceanic and atmospheric dynamics may impact forest growth and carbon sequestration to a greater extent than previously thought. Cross-scale differences in responses to North Atlantic Ocean dynamics highlight complex interplays in the effects of local climate and ocean-atmosphere dynamics on tree growth processes and advocate for the use of different spatial scales in climate-growth research to better understand factors controlling tree growth."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 16479
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 178
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #134 on: March 27, 2018, 03:30:20 PM »
The linked article cites ESLD assumptions that lead to a projection that over half of Alberta's forests will be lost to wildfires and climate change in just over 80-years:

Title: "Half Alberta's boreal forest could disappear due to fires and climate change"

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2018/03/26/news/half-albertas-boreal-forest-could-disappear-due-fires-and-climate-change

Extract: "A study shows half of Alberta's boreal forest could disappear in just over 80 years due to wildfires and climate change.

The research, published Monday in the journal Ecosphere, gives a glimpse at how vegetation could change based on the current rate of carbon emissions and climate change.

"We found that wildfire could initiate the conversion of approximately 50 per cent of the current boreal forest into grassland or deciduous open forest," said Diana Stralberg, who did the research as part of her PhD in the biological sciences department at the University of Alberta.

"If you look at even more extreme assumptions about future wildfire, you would get something closer to 75 per cent conversion.""
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3861
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #135 on: April 15, 2018, 09:34:04 PM »
I  must read this book:

"They’ve been flowering every spring, for the last hundred million years. They flowered in every year you’ve been alive. And with luck, they’ll flower for a few years yet to come."

https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/heres-to-unsuicide-an-interview-with-richard-powers/

sidd

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3625
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 360
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #136 on: June 27, 2018, 10:10:00 PM »
Things are not going well

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2018/jun/27/one-football-pitch-of-forest-lost-every-second-in-2017-data-reveals

One football pitch of forest lost every second in 2017, data revealsGlobal deforestation is on an upward trend, jeopardising efforts to tackle climate change and the massive decline in wildlife

Quote
The world lost more than one football pitch of forest every second in 2017, according to new data from a global satellite survey, adding up to an area equivalent to the whole of Italy over the year.

The scale of tree destruction, much of it done illegally, poses a grave threat to tackling both climate change and the massive global decline in wildlife. The loss in 2017 recorded by Global Forest Watch was 29.4m hectares, the second highest recorded since the monitoring began in 2001.

Global tree cover losses have doubled since 2003, while deforestation in crucial tropical rainforest has doubled since 2008. A falling trend in Brazil has been reversed amid political instability and forest destruction has soared in Colombia.

In other key nations, the Democratic Republic of Congo’s vast forests suffered record losses. However, in Indonesia, deforestation dropped 60% in 2017, helped by fewer forest fires and government action.

Forest losses are a huge contributor to the carbon emissions driving global warming, about the same as total emissions from the US, which is the world’s second biggest polluter. Deforestation destroys wildlife habitat and is a key reason for populations of wildlife having plunged by half in the last 40 years, starting a sixth mass extinction.

“The main reason tropical forests are disappearing is not a mystery – vast areas continue to be cleared for soy, beef, palm oil, timber, and other globally traded commodities,” said Frances Seymour at the World Resources Institute, which produces Global Forest Watch with its partners. “Much of this clearing is illegal and linked to corruption.”
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Daniel B.

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 659
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #137 on: June 28, 2018, 03:34:51 PM »
How sad!  To me, this is the biggest issue we are facing currently.  It has lasting consequences.

dnem

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 169
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #138 on: June 28, 2018, 04:07:53 PM »
It is a big one, Daniel.  If you don't want to get on board with global climate change, I'd add ocean acidification and plastic pollution to your worry list.

oren

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2972
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 319
  • Likes Given: 592
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #139 on: June 28, 2018, 04:09:17 PM »
Indeed. And topsoil degradation, and groundwater depletion.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2157
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #140 on: June 28, 2018, 05:36:01 PM »
Growing population with diminishing fresh water sources (surface and subsurface) is a real bummer for the people involved.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

vox_mundi

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #141 on: November 14, 2018, 05:50:31 PM »
Large Areas of the Brazilian Rainforest at Risk of Losing Legal Protection
https://phys.org/news/2018-11-large-areas-brazilian-rainforest.html



Up to 15 million hectares of the Brazilian Amazon is at risk of losing its legal protection, according to a new study from researchers at Chalmers University of Technology and KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden, and the University of Sao Paulo, Brazil. This is equivalent to more than 4 times the entire forest area of the UK.

... In Brazil, there is a legislative requirement that private landowners designate a certain part of their land for the protection of native vegetation. Private landowners in states that lie in the Amazon region may use up to 20 percent of their land for agriculture, with the rest reserved for nature. But the law contains a paragraph which makes it possible for states to reduce this land use restriction, if more than 65 percent the state's territory is protected public land.

"Earlier studies concluded that this paragraph probably would never be invoked. But we have now shown that the ongoing land tenure regularisation process of undesignated land in the Amazon could lead to the paragraph being invoked in several states in the Amazon region. If this happens, it would become legal to use a further 30 percent of the privately-owned land for agriculture," says Göran Berndes, Professor at Chalmers, and one of the authors behind the study.

This means that between 6.5 and 15.4 million hectares could lose the protections they enjoy today. By way of comparison, the total forest area of the UK is about 3.17 million hectares. The areas that might become legally available for agriculture consist primarily of tropical rainforest, which hold high biodiversity values. Additionally, tropical deforestation causes large carbon dioxide emissions, which contributes to global warming.



Flavio L. M. Freitas et al. Potential increase of legal deforestation in Brazilian Amazon after Forest Act revision, Nature Sustainability (2018)

“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Sleepy

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1143
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 68
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Global Forest Watch
« Reply #142 on: November 15, 2018, 08:34:52 AM »
Bolsonaro’s deforestation of the Amazon has already begun
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/11/14/bolsonaros-deforestation-amazon-already-begun/
Quote
Deforestation in Brazil’s Amazon jumped almost 50% during the three month electoral season that brought Jair Bolsonaro to power, according to preliminary official figures.

That means the forest lost 1,674 sq km from August to October, an area more than double the size of New York City.

The main culprit was the conversion of forest to pasture. The largest increase was in the border area between Acre and Amazonas states. The deforestation increase there, compared with the same period in 2017, was 273% and 114%, respectively.

Deforestation usually increases in Brazil’s electoral years, amid promises from local politicians they will open up protected land or make environmental legislation more flexible if elected.
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.