AuthorTopic: The Environment Board  (Read 45942 times)

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41338
    • View Profile
Re: The Environment Board
« Reply #270 on: May 09, 2020, 10:12:11 PM »
Pictures are for reference. Both  are only 1 foot tall yet!
JOW

JoW you're ALIVE!  :icon_sunny: :icon_sunny: :icon_sunny:

Wazzup in Oz with COVID-19?

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline John of Wallan

  • Waitstaff
  • ***
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
Re: The Environment Board
« Reply #271 on: May 10, 2020, 02:33:40 AM »
Pictures are for reference. Both  are only 1 foot tall yet!
JOW

JoW you're ALIVE!  :icon_sunny: :icon_sunny: :icon_sunny:

Wazzup in Oz with COVID-19?

RE

Yes I am alive.
We survived the fires over summer, just in time to be hit by corona virus.
I started a new job in January. Now running a quarry and working 12 hour days.
Lockdown not affecting us yet... We are still working and following social distancing rules; everyone stays 1.5m away, no hand shaking and washing hands regularly.
Supermarkets and some shops are open. Restaurants take away only, Children not back at school yet. My 2 uni student sons are back home studying online.
Shops still have some shortages and rationing. Toilet paper seems to be back on shelves. Rice and pasta still rationed in some shops. (Buying limits)
Weird weather now. Wet and warm start to the year. Had over half of our average annual rainfall in first quarter.
Talk of coming out of lockdown now. As soon as we do we will start next breakout and next lockdown. Will be a continual cycle until herd immunity is reached, and probably 80% of the old and frail are dead.
Thats short term anyway. Say, next 2 years.
Medium term we are screwed financially. Next 5 years will see great depression mk2 and high inflation with all the stimulus packages getting handed out.
Longer term we will run out of food due to climate change, and we all go Mad Max in 10 years. Mad Max 1 anyway. The original blown 1976 XB Ford Falcon coupe was a beast! I think the movie was called The Road Warrior in Merika, with a very young Mel Gibson. I will channel the Toe-cutter when things get bad.... (Watch the movie if you have not seen it)

Anyway, had a 2 day weekend this week for a change, and we had some more rain, so I thought I better plant some more trees.

I like trees.

JOW

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 19362
    • View Profile
Re: The Environment Board
« Reply #272 on: May 10, 2020, 08:59:07 AM »
Well done, John.   Thanks for sharing that. Change happens with one small act at a time being carried out by one man or woman....or a dedicated few.
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline John of Wallan

  • Waitstaff
  • ***
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
Re: The Environment Board
« Reply #273 on: June 21, 2020, 02:59:15 AM »
Had planty of rain. Perfect tree planting weather.

2 more trees this week.

Fringed Wattle. Acacia fimbriata.
Should be a nice bird attractant tree. Grows 5 to 8m in height. Golden Wattle flowers. Should do well in this area.

Woolly Bush. Adenanthos sericeus. 
Smaller bush, drought and frost tolerant. Nice silvery needle type foliage and small flowers all year round.

Just read an article about a 33 degree C day in Siberia!
How warm is Alaska at the moment RE?

Plant a tree a week until I die is my plan.

JOW

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41338
    • View Profile
Re: The Environment Board
« Reply #274 on: June 21, 2020, 03:13:17 AM »
Had planty of rain. Perfect tree planting weather.

Nice 2 C U JoW.  :icon_sunny:

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline John of Wallan

  • Waitstaff
  • ***
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
Re: The Environment Board
« Reply #275 on: June 21, 2020, 07:48:29 PM »
Had planty of rain. Perfect tree planting weather.

Nice 2 C U JoW.  :icon_sunny:

RE

Nice to be alive. We live in interesting times.....
What the devil is happening up at the higher latitudes RE?
https://www.theage.com.au/environment/climate-change/town-in-the-arctic-circle-records-temperature-as-hot-as-florida-20200622-p554t8.html

Town in the Arctic Circle records temperature as hot as Florida
By Andrew Freedman
June 22, 2020 8.10am

Moscow: A town in Siberia is likely to have set a record for the hottest temperature in the Arctic Circle, reaching 38 degrees.

Verkhoyansk, which is 4828 kilometres east of Moscow and just inside the Arctic Circle, typically reaches a summer high of about 20 degrees.

If verified, this would be the hottest temperature on record in the Arctic, a region that is warming at more than twice the rate of the rest of the globe. Records in the town have been kept since 1885.

Children play in the Krugloe lake outside Verkhoyansk - the Siberian town that endures the world's widest temperature range, which has recorded a new high amid a heatwave that is contributing to severe forest fires.
Children play in the Krugloe lake outside Verkhoyansk - the Siberian town that endures the world's widest temperature range, which has recorded a new high amid a heatwave that is contributing to severe forest fires. CREDIT:AP

On Sunday, the same location recorded a high temperature of 35.2 degrees, showing the Saturday reading was not a fluke.

Verkhoyansk is located at 67.5 degrees north latitude, whereas the Arctic Circle begins at 66.5 degrees.

A thermometer shows 30 degrees in Verkhoyansk about 11pm on June 21.

The town of about 1300 is located farther north than Fairbanks, Alaska, and is known for having an unusually wide temperature range. During the winter, Verkhoyansk is one of the coldest spots in the world, with temperatures frequently dipping well below minus 50 degrees.

Temperatures in Chersky, about 1127 km to the north-east of Verkhoyansk, reached 30 degrees in the past week, which is also unusual and caused by the large area of high pressure, or heat dome, that remains parked over it.

So far in 2020, Siberia has stood out for its above-extreme temperatures, which has accelerated the melting of snow and ice; contributed to permafrost melt, which led to a major oil spill; and got the Siberian wildfire season off to an unusually early and severe start.

The oil spill in Norilsk above the Arctic Circle in north-central Russia leaked at least 20,000 tonnes of diesel fuel into the nearby Ambarnaya River and is thought to be the worst spill in the Russian Arctic's history.


UN Climate Change

@UNFCCC
Temperatures reached +38C within the Arctic Circle this Saturday, 30C hotter than normal. #GlobalHeating is accelerating, and some parts of the world are heating a lot faster than others.
While some questions remain about the accuracy of the Verkhoyansk temperature measurement, data from a Saturday weather balloon launch at that location supports the reading. Temperatures in the lower atmosphere, at about 1500 metres, also were unusually warm at 21 degrees, a sign of extreme heat at the surface.

Such a reading makes the record high "even more legitimate," meteorologist Etienne Kapikian of Meteo France said on Twitter.

Climate activists says recent events prove change is possible
A couple who set off around the world to promote call for action on climate change believe recent events show that the world can make changes.

The World Meteorological Organisation, which verifies global temperature records, does not recognise the polar regions as a separate region for its extremes archive, so the new record may not go in the official history books, according to Randy Cerveny, a professor at Arizona State University who leads the WMO's weather and climate extremes team.

During the spring, stubborn and sprawling areas of high pressure parked over the region resulted in parts of Siberia recording temperature departures from average that reached a staggering 10 degrees, according to the Copernicus Climate Change Service, which is an initiative of the European Union.

According to the report on recent Siberian temperatures, the persistence of the warm anomalies stands out from the historical record.

The recent trends are likely to continue, too, with computer models showing continued extreme warmth in northern Siberia in the next 10 days, spilling over into parts of Canada and Scandinavia.

By pairing the data with NASA's surface records going back to 1880, Copernicus scientists found that this most recent six-month period is probably unprecedented since at least 1880.

The Siberian Arctic, like the Arctic as a whole, is seeing rapidly increasing temperatures as a result of human-caused global warming. This is in part because of accelerating feedback loops between melting snow and ice and air and ground temperatures, as well as other features of the region's climate.

Large wildfires are proliferating from Siberia to Alaska and Scandinavia; permafrost is melting, which releases even more planet-warming greenhouse gases into the atmosphere; and sea ice extent and thickness are plummeting, among other changes.

From Melbourne's "THE AGE" Newspaper today.
Might want to plant a few more fucking trees by the looks of it!

JOW

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41338
    • View Profile
Re: The Environment Board
« Reply #276 on: June 21, 2020, 08:37:08 PM »
Had planty of rain. Perfect tree planting weather.

Nice 2 C U JoW.  :icon_sunny:

RE

Nice to be alive. We live in interesting times.....
What the devil is happening up at the higher latitudes RE?

The outrageously hot weather was in Siberia, not Alaska.  So far here in the Valley it's been a pretty normal spring-summer.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41338
    • View Profile
💨 Saharan dust & COVID-19 in San Antonio
« Reply #277 on: June 22, 2020, 05:23:50 AM »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/SRZ1XS6K_mI" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/SRZ1XS6K_mI</a>
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41338
    • View Profile
💨 Climate change: Planting new forests 'can do more harm than good'
« Reply #278 on: June 23, 2020, 03:45:49 AM »
JoW will not like this report.

RE

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-53138178

Climate change: Planting new forests 'can do more harm than good'
By Matt McGrath Environment correspondent

    22 June 2020

Children planting trees in Ethiopia, a country which has embraced new forests as part of its climate plan  -  Getty Images

Rather than benefiting the environment, large-scale tree planting may do the opposite, two new studies have found.

One paper says that financial incentives to plant trees can backfire and reduce biodiversity with little impact on carbon emissions.

A separate project found that the amount of carbon that new forests can absorb may be overestimated.

The key message from both papers is that planting trees is not a simple climate solution.

    Will millions more trees really stop climate change?
    'A trillion trees to the rescue'
    Trees 'most effective solution' for climate change
    Is there any point in planting new trees?

Over the past few years, the idea of planting trees as a low cost, high impact solution to climate change has really taken hold.
Image copyright Cristian Echeverra
Image caption Last remnant of Chile's Nothofagus alessandrii forests surrounded by forest plantations

Previous studies have indicated that trees have enormous potential to soak up and store carbon, and many countries have established tree planting campaigns as a key element of their plans to tackle climate change.

In the UK, promises by the political parties to plant ever larger numbers of trees were a feature of last year's general election.

In the US, even President Donald Trump has rowed in behind the Trillion Trees Campaign.

Legislation to support the idea has been introduced into the US Congress.

Another major tree planting initiative is called the Bonn Challenge.

Countries are being urged to restore 350 million hectares of degraded and deforested land by 2030.
Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption President Trump planting a tree at the White House to mark Earth Day

So far, around 40 nations have endorsed the idea.

But scientists have urged caution against the headlong rush to plant new forests.

They point to the fact that in the Bonn Challenge nearly 80% of the commitments made to date involve planting monoculture plantations or a limited mix of trees that produce specific products such as fruit or rubber.

The authors of this new study have looked closely at the financial incentives given to private landowners to plant trees.

These payments are seen as a key element of increasing the number of trees significantly.

The study looked at the example of Chile, where a decree subsidising tree planting ran from 1974 to 2012, and was widely seen as a globally influential afforestation policy.

The law subsidised 75% of the costs of planting new forests.
Image copyright Robert Heilmayr
Image caption Recently planted pine plantation on Chiloe Island, Chile

While it was intended not to apply to existing forests, lax enforcement and budgetary limitations meant that some landowners simply replaced native forests with more profitable new tree plantations.

Their study found the subsidy scheme expanded the area covered by trees, but decreased the area of native forest.

The authors point out that since Chile's native forests are rich in biodiversity and store large amounts of carbon, the subsidy scheme failed to increase the carbon stores and accelerated biodiversity loss.

"If policies to incentivise tree plantations are poorly designed or poorly enforced, there is a high risk of not only wasting public money but also releasing more carbon and losing biodiversity," said co-author Prof Eric Lambin, from Stanford University.

"That's the exact opposite of what these policies are aiming for."

A second study set out to examine how much carbon a newly planted forest would be able to absorb from the atmosphere.

Up until now, many scientists have calculated the amount of carbon that trees can pull down from the air using a fixed ratio.

Suspecting that this ratio would depend on local conditions, the researchers looked at northern China, which has seen intensive tree planting by the government because of climate change but also in an effort to reduce dust from the Gobi desert.

Looking at 11,000 soil samples taken from afforested plots, the scientists found that in carbon poor soils, adding new trees did increase the density of organic carbon.

But where soils were already rich in carbon, adding new trees decreased this density.

The authors say that previous assumptions about how much organic carbon can be fixed by planting new trees is likely an overestimate.

"We hope that people can understand that afforestation practices are not one single thing," said Dr Anping Chen, from Colorado State University and a lead author on the study.

"Afforestation involves many technical details and balances of different parts, and it cannot solve all our climate problems."

Both papers have been published in the journal Nature Sustainability.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18546
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: 💨 Climate change: Planting new forests 'can do more harm than good'
« Reply #279 on: June 23, 2020, 04:16:05 AM »
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-53138178

Climate change: Planting new forests 'can do more harm than good'
By Matt McGrath Environment correspondent

"Afforestation involves many technical details and balances of different parts, and it cannot solve all our climate problems."

I don't think anyone ever asserted that it would. But it seems to me that it beats hell out of hand-wringing and otherwise doing nothing, or sending a fleet of private jets to Davos to "study" the problem.
"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world's grief. Do justly now, love mercy now, walk humbly now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it."

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 41338
    • View Profile
Re: 💨 Climate change: Planting new forests 'can do more harm than good'
« Reply #280 on: June 23, 2020, 04:21:43 AM »
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-53138178

Climate change: Planting new forests 'can do more harm than good'
By Matt McGrath Environment correspondent

"Afforestation involves many technical details and balances of different parts, and it cannot solve all our climate problems."

I don't think anyone ever asserted that it would. But it seems to me that it beats hell out of hand-wringing and otherwise doing nothing, or sending a fleet of private jets to Davos to "study" the problem.

That is quite true.  The part about Davos especially.

In the meantime, if they are Fruit Trees, they can help feed people.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline John of Wallan

  • Waitstaff
  • ***
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
Re: The Environment Board
« Reply #281 on: June 23, 2020, 01:10:58 PM »
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-53138178

Climate change: Planting new forests 'can do more harm than good'
By Matt McGrath Environment correspondent

"Afforestation involves many technical details and balances of different parts, and it cannot solve all our climate problems."

I don't think anyone ever asserted that it would. But it seems to me that it beats hell out of hand-wringing and otherwise doing nothing, or sending a fleet of private jets to Davos to "study" the problem.


Best solutions in ranked order:
1. Dont cut down native forests.Let me explain further: DONT CUT DOWN NATIVE FORESTS STUPID MORONS!
2. Try and let cut areas regenerate as diverse as possible from neighbouring native areas with simmilar biodiversity. It will never be back to original once cut as there are small micro climates and differences in biodiversity in areas literally meters apart.
3. Re-plant cut forests as diverse as possible with local indiginous plants.
4. Plant commercial timber or fruit trees with some native remnant trees left in area. At least planted trees are helping sequester carbon and giving local benefits; water cycle, colling and evaporation, some habitat and food for all animals not just humans. Timber housing also stores some carbon for life of house.
5. Plant any fucking trees! They do some benefit. Mine attract birdlife and bees, supply us some food, act as wind breaks, supply me with forewood eventually, increase evaporation and cooling in summer and sequester carbon.

Headlines like 'Planting new forests 'can do more harm than good' is very misleading, and is an excuse to launder guilt over inaction and  alow us to cut down more native forests and not give a shit.

I was told once how I am not green as I cut trees for firewood, by the property owner I cut wood on no less. I am pretty sure I was environmentally preaching to him at the time.. I dont do this anymore.. Much.. Outside this forum anyway... When I explained to him that I have been cutting wood on his property for 20 years and he agreed there seems to be more trees now than before I started, I said to  him this must be sustainable harvesting, and the new trees take up the carbon my fire puts out, unlike his gas fire which is fosilised carbon stored millions of years ago being released now to drive up CO2 levels.... He thought about it for a minute and walked away grumbling. He was a school teacher before he retired. They cant handle being wrong. (Neither can us engineers. but we never are!)  ;D

I still plan to plant a tree a week until I die. I dont give a shit about what others think of this plan. It gives me great pleasure seeing them grow and the fauna they attract to my area, so I will keep doing it. It also pisses off my mother in law. Added bonus!

JOW

Offline Nearingsfault

  • Sous Chef
  • ****
  • Posts: 1346
    • View Profile
Re: The Environment Board
« Reply #282 on: June 23, 2020, 01:16:57 PM »
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-53138178

Climate change: Planting new forests 'can do more harm than good'
By Matt McGrath Environment correspondent

"Afforestation involves many technical details and balances of different parts, and it cannot solve all our climate problems."

I don't think anyone ever asserted that it would. But it seems to me that it beats hell out of hand-wringing and otherwise doing nothing, or sending a fleet of private jets to Davos to "study" the problem.


Best solutions in ranked order:
1. Dont cut down native forests.Let me explain further: DONT CUT DOWN NATIVE FORESTS STUPID MORONS!
2. Try and let cut areas regenerate as diverse as possible from neighbouring native areas with simmilar biodiversity. It will never be back to original once cut as there are small micro climates and differences in biodiversity in areas literally meters apart.
3. Re-plant cut forests as diverse as possible with local indiginous plants.
4. Plant commercial timber or fruit trees with some native remnant trees left in area. At least planted trees are helping sequester carbon and giving local benefits; water cycle, colling and evaporation, some habitat and food for all animals not just humans. Timber housing also stores some carbon for life of house.
5. Plant any fucking trees! They do some benefit. Mine attract birdlife and bees, supply us some food, act as wind breaks, supply me with forewood eventually, increase evaporation and cooling in summer and sequester carbon.

Headlines like 'Planting new forests 'can do more harm than good' is very misleading, and is an excuse to launder guilt over inaction and  alow us to cut down more native forests and not give a shit.

I was told once how I am not green as I cut trees for firewood, by the property owner I cut wood on no less. I am pretty sure I was environmentally preaching to him at the time.. I dont do this anymore.. Much.. Outside this forum anyway... When I explained to him that I have been cutting wood on his property for 20 years and he agreed there seems to be more trees now than before I started, I said to  him this must be sustainable harvesting, and the new trees take up the carbon my fire puts out, unlike his gas fire which is fosilised carbon stored millions of years ago being released now to drive up CO2 levels.... He thought about it for a minute and walked away grumbling. He was a school teacher before he retired. They cant handle being wrong. (Neither can us engineers. but we never are!)  ;D

I still plan to plant a tree a week until I die. I dont give a shit about what others think of this plan. It gives me great pleasure seeing them grow and the fauna they attract to my area, so I will keep doing it. It also pisses off my mother in law. Added bonus!

JOW
first thing I've enjoyed reading in a week. Nice to see you posting JOW...
If its important then try something, fail, disect, learn from it, try again, and again and again until it kills you or you succeed.

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 19362
    • View Profile
Re: The Environment Board
« Reply #283 on: June 23, 2020, 01:25:31 PM »
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-53138178

Climate change: Planting new forests 'can do more harm than good'
By Matt McGrath Environment correspondent

"Afforestation involves many technical details and balances of different parts, and it cannot solve all our climate problems."

I don't think anyone ever asserted that it would. But it seems to me that it beats hell out of hand-wringing and otherwise doing nothing, or sending a fleet of private jets to Davos to "study" the problem.


Best solutions in ranked order:
1. Dont cut down native forests.Let me explain further: DONT CUT DOWN NATIVE FORESTS STUPID MORONS!
2. Try and let cut areas regenerate as diverse as possible from neighbouring native areas with simmilar biodiversity. It will never be back to original once cut as there are small micro climates and differences in biodiversity in areas literally meters apart.
3. Re-plant cut forests as diverse as possible with local indiginous plants.
4. Plant commercial timber or fruit trees with some native remnant trees left in area. At least planted trees are helping sequester carbon and giving local benefits; water cycle, colling and evaporation, some habitat and food for all animals not just humans. Timber housing also stores some carbon for life of house.
5. Plant any fucking trees! They do some benefit. Mine attract birdlife and bees, supply us some food, act as wind breaks, supply me with forewood eventually, increase evaporation and cooling in summer and sequester carbon.

Headlines like 'Planting new forests 'can do more harm than good' is very misleading, and is an excuse to launder guilt over inaction and  alow us to cut down more native forests and not give a shit.

I was told once how I am not green as I cut trees for firewood, by the property owner I cut wood on no less. I am pretty sure I was environmentally preaching to him at the time.. I dont do this anymore.. Much.. Outside this forum anyway... When I explained to him that I have been cutting wood on his property for 20 years and he agreed there seems to be more trees now than before I started, I said to  him this must be sustainable harvesting, and the new trees take up the carbon my fire puts out, unlike his gas fire which is fosilised carbon stored millions of years ago being released now to drive up CO2 levels.... He thought about it for a minute and walked away grumbling. He was a school teacher before he retired. They cant handle being wrong. (Neither can us engineers. but we never are!)  ;D

I still plan to plant a tree a week until I die. I dont give a shit about what others think of this plan. It gives me great pleasure seeing them grow and the fauna they attract to my area, so I will keep doing it. It also pisses off my mother in law. Added bonus!

JOW

Tree planters are my heroes. You the man. In my grandfather's day they still had old growth forests in the part of Texas where I grew up. He liked to say that you could drive a wagon right through the woodlands. No roads needed. I grew up hunting with my dad in the cut-over remains......a total briar patch.

I'll chance anybody planting as many trees as they want. It beats the crap out of doing nothing.
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline John of Wallan

  • Waitstaff
  • ***
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
Re: The Environment Board
« Reply #284 on: July 04, 2020, 03:40:03 AM »
Bought a flowering ash: Fraxinus grifithii cheap from the local hardware store.... $10 on special. Looks a bit tired.
Have not figured out where to plant it yet. Will do that tomorrow.

Just looked it up on wikipedia:
Fraxinus griffithii, the Himalayan ash or evergreen ash is a species of flowering tree. The natural habitat includes the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Myanmar, Taiwan, China, Bangladesh and India. This plant is commonly grown as an ornamental in Australia, where it is an invasive species.

Oh well.. Still will look nice in the garden...

Will try and propogate some calistimon cutings in spring. I am getting a soft spot for them!

A tree a week until I die.

JOW

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
801 Views
Last post April 21, 2016, 02:16:25 AM
by Guest
0 Replies
1137 Views
Last post May 07, 2016, 05:43:56 AM
by RE
0 Replies
661 Views
Last post June 26, 2019, 08:42:03 PM
by Eddie