33 points
*

Do anyone have that new article that was like, accusing them of genociding a desert because they turned it into a forest or some shit? I remember it form a year or so back. The reforested an area of desert and this journalist was losing him mind over it.

Edit:

https://lemmygrad.ml/post/414155

Ok apparently I posted about it and my memory is just that bad. Lmao. Thanks to comrade GrainEater for reminding me.

permalink
report
reply
17 points

The biggest criticism I’ve seen is that the planting project ended up being a huge monoculture of poplar trees, but that was kinda the norm back then in reforestation.

The last I heard the forest they planted was dying from a beetle infestation, and they were going to attempt a redo with a lot more species of trees.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

But fostering biodiversity remains a challenge, conservationists say

Checkmate China, what’s the point if you can’t just magically spawn the Amazon forest

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

That is a valid concern. One of the largest problems with the project was that they planted massive monocultures of single trees. Something that is extremely dangerous as a single parasite, disease, or pest could annihilate hundreds of thousands of square kilometers.

Plus monocultures limit biodiversity to an extreme capacity as the entire forest is suitable only to a very limited number of species. It’s not that the animals aren’t there to begin with, it’s that not many can survive in the mass monoculture forest.

permalink
report
parent
reply

you posted this about a year ago, that might be it

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

My memory really is just that bad. Lmao.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

South America and Africa having lost about 13% forest coverage over 30 years is extremely sad

permalink
report
reply
15 points

Can someone explains this map to me? The text says China leads, but the numbers say Vietnam is at 56.2%, greater than China’s 40%.

permalink
report
reply
26 points

I mean, it’s pretty obvious… China is huge, Vietnam is tiny compared to it. The reforested area is, therefore, much larger in China.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Also vietnam is still recovering from the war I imagine

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

It’s hard to take care of the forest when there is still tons of inexploded murican ordnance in it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

the forests are well recovered from the war. it was 50 years ago, and the monsoons really make growth relatively easy.

permalink
report
parent
reply

The map is the forest area in 2020, relative to existing forest area in 1990 (no change would be 0%).

So, if you count by absolute area, China leads, and if you count by relative area, Uruguay leads.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

It’s forest added, not amount of forest

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

leads the increase

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Its absolute numbers, which favors China.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

You know Vietnam is a tropical country.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Why is that relevant?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

much easier growth of tree coverage…

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Why is “private forest ownership” a thing?

permalink
report
reply
8 points

Hey, the US actually expanded its forests. Go us!

permalink
report
reply
9 points

One of the few good pieces of legislation put forth have curtailed the reach and power of the logging industry and development industries significantly. This is why capitalists in the US hate the EPA.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Going by the logic of US media, it’s probably abandoned towns and cities being overgrown.

Wait, it might actually be true.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Yeah honestly that’s really surprising

permalink
report
parent
reply

Community stats

  • 761

    Monthly active users

  • 3K

    Posts

  • 18K

    Comments