All of the focus has been on the guilt of the United States, even though third world countries are clearing rainforests and using destructive agricultural practices, causing nitrogen rich runoff to suffocate the coral reefs. Rainforests and reefs are the biggest carbon sinks on Earth and perhaps we should spend more attention on restoring them. Carbon Dioxide is not a pollutant, the concern is just a buildup in the atmosphere. Right? So we need to focus on sequestration. Counting the net loss of Brazil's Carbon sequestration against the gain of not using petroleum, did the World gain? It seems to me that we could address CO2 levels by improving the quality of life for people in the underdeveloped world through education of better forestry and farming practices. (and moving past fossil fuels too).
2007-03-09
03:18:01
·
2 answers
·
asked by
Brian L
4
in
Environment
I don't believe a corn crop has a comparable CO2 capacity to virgin rainforest, particularly when you count the vertical density of rainforest. Also, the Summer Winter cycle is not balanced, the Ratio of Carbon in to out is like 4:1. Also, cleared forest generates large volumes of CO2.
2007-03-09
03:57:04 ·
update #1
If we were to not look at Brazil's impact on the Carbon issue based on the "you did it first" argument, you would have to then say you can't criticize the U.S. and Europe because they just happened to do it first. The argument is parochial and doesn't move us any closer to an answer.
2007-03-09
04:08:46 ·
update #2