Calculate your site FeedRank Today
FeedRank, a newly developed algorithm for ranking RSS feeds only on RSSMicro
Click here to learn more
 10/10 Excellent --- feeds.wired.com http://feeds.wired.com/wired/science
| Understanding the latest research and theories. ... |
Tuesday, May 20, 2008 --- 61 days ago http://feeds.wired.com/~r/wired/science/~3/293977226/sb_carbon
|
No one with any scientific sense now disagrees about the severity of the climate crisis. But some people — and some magazines — believe that climate change trumps every other problem. If we take this argument to its extreme, we should ignore any environmental concern that gets in the way of reducing emissions. And that's just plain wrong.
Make no mistake: Tackling climate change is vital. But to see everything through the lens of short-term CO 2 reductions, letting our obsession with carbon blind us to the bigger picture, is to court catastrophe.
Climate change is not a discrete issue; it's a symptom of larger problems. Fundamentally, our society as currently designed has no future. We're chewing up the planet so fast, in so many different ways, that we could solve the climate problem tomorrow and still find that environmental collapse is imminent. Myopic responses will only hasten its arrival.
Take the proposal that we cut down old trees in favor of new ones. First, I don't buy the carbon accounting presented to advance this procrustean plan: Older trees can absorb CO 2 for centuries after reaching maturity, while replanted forests can emit more CO 2 than they sequester until the new trees are as much as 20 years old.
But even if wired's math were correct, this would still be a crap fix for climate change. Chopping down forests causes massive soil erosion and leads to desertification, making repeated tree plantings ... |
|
|
Recent Posts
|
|
|
Facebook Del.icio.us Digg StumbleUpon Reddit Google
Anytime
