The fable of anthropogenic warming and the fight against CO2

[ABC2019]

But if Tryphounet, remember:
nuclear-fossil-energies / the-fessenheim-closure-an-ecological-fault-t16314-30.html? hilit = regreening # p381494

yes remember

It is therefore probable, in the light of the studies cited, that there are indeed more trees on earth than there were twenty years ago (including due to global warming).

Your answer has nothing to do with the greening due to agriculture which we talk about in the article. Thanks for stopping by for nothing.

my answer is just an extract from yours, so please read your own posts ...

[GuyGadebois]

yes remember

Your answer has nothing to do with the greening due to agriculture which we talk about in the article. Thanks for stopping by for nothing.

my answer is just an extract from yours, so please read your own posts ...

I too can copy / paste passages that have nothing to do with the discussion.

[phil12]

https://blogs.letemps.ch/dorota-retelsk ... is-de-mai/

[GuyGadebois]

Good news, it will be green again!

[ABC2019]

Your answer has nothing to do with the greening due to agriculture which we talk about in the article. Thanks for stopping by for nothing.

my answer is just an extract from yours, so please read your own posts ...

I too can copy / paste passages that have nothing to do with the discussion.

you are the one completely lost in the discussion, Tryphon and the article both say the same thing, that re-greening is NOT due to agriculture, but to reforestation.

[ABC2019]

https://blogs.letemps.ch/dorota-retelska/2020/05/27/la-siberie-est-touchee-par-une-vague-de-chaleur-exceptionnelle-35c-au-mois-de-mai/

If there is an exceptional phenomenon of 10 ° C above the averages, it is that it has nothing to do with CR, the phenomenon would have been just as exceptional without CR. It's weather, not climate, the climate is averages over 30 years, we are told enough.

[GuyGadebois]

you are the one completely lost in the discussion, Tryphon and the article both say the same thing, that re-greening is NOT due to agriculture, but to reforestation.

"Massive use of irrigation, fertilizers and mechanization

However, this type of culture is much less favorable for the environment. “If reforestation such as that observed on the Great Green Wall or in the countries of Eastern Europe increases the storage of CO2, it is not the same for cultivated fields, including the CO2 they absorb is quickly released into the atmosphere, ”explains Victor Brovkin, of the Max-Planck Institute for Meteorology and co-author of the study. On the other hand, this intensive agriculture has largely developed at the cost of increased crop rotation, untimely pumping of underground water tables and massive use of fertilizers and pesticides. The two countries are thus the leading consumers of fertilizers in the world, and Brazil is following exactly the same trend (the latter also encroaches on its primary forests to extend its crops). If more greenery leads to depleted water supplies, depleted soils and polluted rivers, there is nothing to celebrate. "

Come on, now you're going to bed and you don't forget your tototte and your comforter ('blabla).

[GuyGadebois]

To speak only of China and India (but it is valid for Brazil and others)

Indeed, the two Asian giants which total 9% of the surface of the emerged lands, represent 33% of the greening on the planet since the year 2000. China - 6,3% of the emerged lands - contributes even for 25% to this greening. 42% of this greening comes from the expansion of forests and 32% of cultivation in China whilein India 82% of greening comes from cultivation and only 4,4% of forests.
However, the authors emphasize that the change in land use by human activities has been the main factor in greening since the year 2000. And this has mainly resulted in cultivation; 6 of the 7 green areas designated on the map are because intensive agriculture has taken place.
The extension of agriculture during the period 2000-2017 can be "attributed to fast growing hybrid cultivars, multiple crops, irrigation, use of fertilizers, pest control, better quality seeds, agricultural mechanization, availability of finance and crop insurance programs, ”say the study's authors.

Contrary to what one might think, the fertilizing effect of CO2 is therefore not the predominant factor in the greening of our planet, it is primarily agriculture followed by the planting of trees which contribute to it . Unfortunately, intensive agriculture is also accompanied by an increased use of pesticides, fertilizers ... and contributes both to the pollution of ecosystems and to the degradation of biodiversity.

Finally, the planting of new forests is not always enough to compensate for global deforestation, especially since it is accompanied by a loss of biodiversity which cannot be restored in the short or medium term.

https://www.notre-planete.info/actualit ... orestation
You have the right, little ABC, to dip your tototte in the Phénergan.

[ABC2019]

you are the one completely lost in the discussion, Tryphon and the article both say the same thing, that re-greening is NOT due to agriculture, but to reforestation.

"Massive use of irrigation, fertilizers and mechanization

However, this type of culture is much less favorable for the environment. “If reforestation such as that observed on the Great Green Wall or in the countries of Eastern Europe increases the storage of CO2, it is not the same for cultivated fields, including the CO2 they absorb is quickly released into the atmosphere, ”explains Victor Brovkin, of the Max-Planck Institute for Meteorology and co-author of the study. On the other hand, this intensive agriculture has largely developed at the cost of increased crop rotation, untimely pumping of underground water tables and massive use of fertilizers and pesticides. The two countries are thus the leading consumers of fertilizers in the world, and Brazil is following exactly the same trend (the latter also encroaches on its primary forests to extend its crops). If more greenery leads to depleted water supplies, depleted soils and polluted rivers, there is nothing to celebrate. "

Come on, now you're going to bed and you don't forget your tototte and your comforter ('blabla).

all that your passage says is that the greening due to agriculture does not store CO2 (for the reason that I said, it is that the cultures generally return almost in their initial state at the after one year). It does not say that the greening is mainly due to the crops, even if they contribute to it (in particular with the fact of making pluri annual harvests which increases the time of vegetation of the fields).

[ABC2019]

https://www.notre-planete.info/actualit ... orestation
You have the right, little ABC, to dip your tototte in the Phénergan.

except that if you read the article well there is no overall quantification on the part of agriculture and reforestation in greening - as usual in this kind of literature, full of partial figures and difficult to interpret, in general because we only want to keep the part that makes the most anxiety buzz.