User Controls
World to hit temperature tipping point 10 years faster than forecast
-
2022-09-05 at 6:03 PM UTC
-
2022-09-05 at 6:46 PM UTC
-
2022-09-05 at 11:59 PM UTC
-
2022-09-06 at 12:38 AM UTC
-
2022-09-06 at 2:16 AM UTC
-
2022-09-06 at 2:17 AM UTC
-
2022-09-06 at 2:29 AM UTC‘Greenwashing’: Tree-Planting Schemes Are Just Creating Tree Cemeteries
Experts have told VICE World News that not only were they planted at the wrong time of year, but that they were planted on species-rich grassland that was already carbon negative, which has now been mostly destroyed by tree planting. Environmentalists also point out that the trees were planted so shallowly into the ground that most were unlikely to ever take root.
Tree-planting initiatives have become an increasingly popular way to offset carbon, with companies and governments around the world committing to reforestation schemes as they deal with the climate crisis. But critics say that tree planting takes decades to benefit the environment, and can be used as ‘greenwashing’ – a way of companies looking good while failing to fully commit to decarbonisation and divesting from the fossil-fuel industry.
A number of regional and national governments have announced enormous tree planting schemes in the past few years as momentum has built to tackle the climate crisis – and many of them haven’t gone to plan. Hackney Council’s partnership with charity Trees for Cities, which was funded by Coca Cola’s company Honest Organic, was criticised in 2020 when it appeared that most, if not all, of the 4,000 trees planted had died.
There are no quick fixes with this crisis,” Gardner said, looking out across the thousands of dead trees. “Simply planting trees isn’t the answer. If we want these trees to have a real impact, they’ve got to still be alive in 100 years and that means it’s a 100-year commitment, not a 1-day commitment.
“The most important thing is to stop burning fossil fuels. The second most important thing is conserve the nature we already have. Trying to create new nature to absorb our fossil fuel emissions is way down the list of priorities.” -
2022-09-06 at 2:29 AM UTCVice...
Experts...
-
2022-09-06 at 2:31 AM UTC
-
2022-09-06 at 2:32 AM UTC
-
2022-09-06 at 12:30 PM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker Do you often confuse mockery with complaints?
US farmers face plague of pests as global heating raises soil temperaturesThe report follows research from the University of Washington in 2018 that found 2C (3.6F) of warming would boost the number and appetite of insects globally, causing them to destroy 50% more wheat and 30% more maize than they do now. Rising heat stress is already affecting yields, with harvests of staple crops in Europe down this year as a result of heatwaves and drought.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2022-09-06 at 12:40 PM UTCJesus that is very close.
-
2022-09-06 at 12:47 PM UTCSe we eat roasted locusts instead of bread...win/win as locusts are full of protein and much healthier than bread anyway.
-
2022-09-06 at 12:51 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Se we eat roasted locusts instead of bread...win/win as locusts are full of protein and much healthier than bread anyway.
And what about the corn?
The rice?
The potato?
The vegetables?
The fruit?
The fish?
Are locusts healthier than all of those? -
2022-09-06 at 12:56 PM UTC
-
2022-09-06 at 1:24 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Yes.
corn rice and taters are mostly starch and carbs, fish aren't going anywhere and certainly are not being eaten by locusts.
Lol what?
Fish populations are already drastically lower than they were 20-30 years ago.
The price of fish worldwide has increased proportionally to inflation because of this.
In your world, are we just going to eat locusts and fish? No more greens? -
2022-09-06 at 1:46 PM UTC
-
2022-09-06 at 2:04 PM UTC
-
2022-09-06 at 3:16 PM UTC
-
2022-09-06 at 5:13 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe
US farmers face plague of pests as global heating raises soil temperatures
Serious questions:
Do you read every article you link?
Do you believe every article you read?
Do you ever read an article that you don't believe?
If the answer to the third question is yes could you please link some of those articles?
