Comments on: The new adventures of old pristine http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/ The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics Fri, 09 Jan 2009 07:03:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1 By: llewelly http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17794 llewelly Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:47:30 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17794 <blockquote> The past year has brought an avalanche of data that is destined to profoundly effect the models. </blockquote> Don't you mean 'affect' rather than 'effect'? [<em>JR: Fixed, thanks!</em>]

The past year has brought an avalanche of data that is destined to profoundly effect the models.

Don’t you mean ‘affect’ rather than ‘effect’?

[JR: Fixed, thanks!]

]]> By: Paul K http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17796 Paul K Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:54:34 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17796 Joe, Does this new information affect your opposition to tree planting as a carbon offset. Joe,
Does this new information affect your opposition to tree planting as a carbon offset.

]]> By: Marguerite Manteau-Rao http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17804 Marguerite Manteau-Rao Wed, 20 Aug 2008 19:53:27 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17804 This is why we need a better job of educating the public about biodiversity loss, what it means, why we should care, and what we can do about it: http://lamarguerite.wordpress.com/2008/08/14/whats-wrong-with-biodiversity/ http://lamarguerite.wordpress.com/2008/08/20/getting-biodiversity-onto-the-cultural-radar-screen/ This is why we need a better job of educating the public about biodiversity loss, what it means, why we should care, and what we can do about it:

http://lamarguerite.wordpress.com/ 2008/ 08/ 14/ whats-wrong-with-biodiversity/

http://lamarguerite.wordpress.com/ 2008/ 08/ 20/ getting-biodiversity-onto-the-cultural-radar-screen/

]]> By: kenlevenson http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17806 kenlevenson Wed, 20 Aug 2008 22:14:12 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17806 Paul K, Why do you give Joe a hard time about forests? After all, forestry is a wedge. Offset pro/con is a separate debate altogether. Paul K,
Why do you give Joe a hard time about forests? After all, forestry is a wedge. Offset pro/con is a separate debate altogether.

]]> By: Paul K http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17821 Paul K Thu, 21 Aug 2008 01:26:45 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17821 kenlevenson, No hard time was intended. Joe's main objection to reforestation as offset is not enough bang for the buck. Wouldn't it make sense for him to moderate his opposition if the bang is better than previously thought? kenlevenson,
No hard time was intended. Joe’s main objection to reforestation as offset is not enough bang for the buck. Wouldn’t it make sense for him to moderate his opposition if the bang is better than previously thought?

]]> By: Peter Wood http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17823 Peter Wood Thu, 21 Aug 2008 01:52:55 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17823 Mackey et al.'s green carbon report is <a href="http://epress.anu.edu.au/green_carbon_citation.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>. I suspect that if reforestation is included as an offset, or in an emissions trading scheme in Australia, then it would be likely that less hardwood plantations would be available for timber and pulp, increasing the demand for native forest timber and perversely increasing emissions. It is essential that forest degradation is included in greenhouse accounts as soon as possible. Mackey et al.’s green carbon report is here.

I suspect that if reforestation is included as an offset, or in an emissions trading scheme in Australia, then it would be likely that less hardwood plantations would be available for timber and pulp, increasing the demand for native forest timber and perversely increasing emissions.

It is essential that forest degradation is included in greenhouse accounts as soon as possible.

]]> By: Jill B http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17826 Jill B Thu, 21 Aug 2008 05:06:02 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17826 I have been confused about the role of forests and trees in the context of climate change for some time. So now that it is a topic, maybe you can answer these questions (or do another blog on it!). I can certainly understand the need to keep our natural forests and ecosystems intact, so as to not have an adverse effect. But I also know that trees are part of the natural carbon cycle, which is not where the concern is, since they continue to grow, die, decompose and sprout new trees. So, it's a quick carbon cycle. It would seem that deforestation on a large scale will create adverse effects (not only on climate) and that natural systems are better than plantations (for reasons other than climate too) but I've also read that studies have shown that the idea of planting trees to offset or make a difference is a bit of a stretch, unless there is significant replanting in the tropics. Also, I've been skeptical of PG&Es program to offset GHG emissions by giving money to Sempervirens - a great organization that protects redwoods. But those trees already exist and are not in danger of really being harvested, so how can this be an offset? (I'm not arguing against protecting them, I support Sempervirens, only questioning its validity in terms of global warming.) What's the real science regarding trees and CO2 and cllmate change? And should a local govt be using tree planting as part of its efforts to combat global warming?? I have been confused about the role of forests and trees in the context of climate change for some time. So now that it is a topic, maybe you can answer these questions (or do another blog on it!).

I can certainly understand the need to keep our natural forests and ecosystems intact, so as to not have an adverse effect. But I also know that trees are part of the natural carbon cycle, which is not where the concern is, since they continue to grow, die, decompose and sprout new trees. So, it’s a quick carbon cycle.

It would seem that deforestation on a large scale will create adverse effects (not only on climate) and that natural systems are better than plantations (for reasons other than climate too) but I’ve also read that studies have shown that the idea of planting trees to offset or make a difference is a bit of a stretch, unless there is significant replanting in the tropics.

Also, I’ve been skeptical of PG&Es program to offset GHG emissions by giving money to Sempervirens - a great organization that protects redwoods. But those trees already exist and are not in danger of really being harvested, so how can this be an offset? (I’m not arguing against protecting them, I support Sempervirens, only questioning its validity in terms of global warming.)

What’s the real science regarding trees and CO2 and cllmate change? And should a local govt be using tree planting as part of its efforts to combat global warming??

]]> By: kenlevenson http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17833 kenlevenson Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:12:14 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17833 Paul K and Peter Wood, Joe describes the problem of using reforestation as an offset last year, here: http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/7/2/1300/61086 The interesting thing about this study is that it's targeting pristine forests....(obviously reforested areas aren't pristine) Jill B, You actually seem to have a pretty good handle on one very tricky subject. Regarding forestry offsets and their pros and cons - see the same link above to Joe's post on it. Paul K and Peter Wood,

Joe describes the problem of using reforestation as an offset last year, here:
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/7/2/1300/61086

The interesting thing about this study is that it’s targeting pristine forests….(obviously reforested areas aren’t pristine)

Jill B,
You actually seem to have a pretty good handle on one very tricky subject. Regarding forestry offsets and their pros and cons - see the same link above to Joe’s post on it.

]]> By: David B. Benson http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17846 David B. Benson Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:45:13 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/20/the-new-adventures-of-old-pristine/#comment-17846 It doesn't matter where trees are replanted, every one will help. The issue is what to do with the wood when the trees are fully mature. I opine that sequestering some as torrified wood, deep underground, is a good idea. It doesn’t matter where trees are replanted, every one will help. The issue is what to do with the wood when the trees are fully mature. I opine that sequestering some as torrified wood, deep underground, is a good idea.

]]>