How to make the forests compensate for the emission of carbon into the atmosphere?

Climate scientists claim that stopping the warming only by reducing emissions, and even stopping deforestation will not be enough, since to stop the warming, the current concentration of DTP (carbon dioxide CO2) in the atmosphere, which has already exceeded 400 parts per million, must be reduced. In other words, in order to meet the goals, it is necessary to absorb DTP from the atmosphere and "store" it for a long time. According to calculations, in order to reach a balance, 500 billion tons must be absorbed from the atmosphere before the end of the current century. There are several chemical or geological ways to adsorb DTP. Some are very expensive and others are still impractical

These days, the Paris Agreement has come into force, according to which the countries will do what is necessary to stop global warming by 1.5 degrees. This is out of recognition that I have toה of SThi Maalot will be a serious harm to the environment and its inhabitants.

Since it is clear that the main victims of the warming are poor developing countries, while they are the countries that contribute less to the warming, it was agreed that every year one hundred billion dollars will be allocated to prepare for natural disasters in the developing countries and to a limited extent to initiatives to stop the warming, i.e. to stop the emission of pollutants.

Climate scientists claim that stopping the warming only on By me Reducing emissions, and even stopping deforestation will not be enough, since to stop the warming, the current concentration of CO2 (carbon dioxide) in the atmosphere must be reduced, which has already exceeded 400 parts per million. In other words, in order to meet the goals, it is necessary to absorb DTP from the atmosphere and "store" it for a long time. According to calculations, in order to reach a balance, 500 billion tons must be absorbed from the atmosphere before the end of the current century. There are several chemical or geological ways to adsorb DTP. Some are very expensive and others are still impractical.

The more correct and natural way is to help nature By me Trees absorb GHG and thus prevent its concentration from rising in the atmosphere, or in the language of climate scientists, trees allow "negative emissions".

Different bodies offer different ways to reduce the concentration of DTP in the atmosphere. Forests absorb DTP from the atmosphere and store it in trees and soil. To ensure that the forests "fulfill their role" they must be managed so that old trees are cut down and new trees are planted in their place. And what will happen in periods of drought or when pests attack? Conditions where the trees will "release" the DTP quickly and in large quantities. Another shortcoming lies in the calculation that in order to absorb 500 billion tons, it is necessary to deforest 10 million square kilometers.

One of the suggestions that was made was that instead of trying to plant deciduous forests that will house the DTP forever, it is possible to use the trees for energy on By me Felling and burning in power plants. It is understood that the place of the cut trees must be filled with new ones, and thus the emission from the fire will be offset By me The new trees.

The European Union promotes the use of "biological energy". About half of the trees that are cut are used to generate electricity and heating, which caused the growth of industrial forestry. But it turns out that the countries that use the most trees are also the ones that lack the systems to ensure planting.

Tim Sarchinger from Princeton University says: "You can cut down all the Amazon trees and burn them in Europe instead of coal and the European Union will claim a reduction in emissions - really." The assumption that using wood from forests is a balance in emissions is wrong because of the time factor, since trees that are burned emit GHG, while the "replacement" trees will absorb the same amount of GHG only when they grow. Therefore, there is doubt as to the extent to which the use of this method is indeed sustainable.

There is the possibility of using forests as a "negative emission" when the trees are used for fire

In combination with the DTP "capture" technology in the power plants, capture and removal from the system By me Landfill (in salt mines, wells, etc.). This method is called "Biomass - CO500 capture and storage" (BECCS) and many see it as the "holy grail" of reducing CO5 concentration in the atmosphere, since in a perfect system the trees absorb COXNUMX, are burned and provide energy, and the COXNUMX is buried, that is, the more you produce Energy In this method, the concentration of DTP in the atmosphere is reduced. According to the proponents, by the end of this century it is possible to reach a system that will collect XNUMX billion tons of DTP in a forest area of ​​about XNUMX million square kilometers, which is half of the previous possibility.

The concept of the DTP and its burial is applied in small power plants. that in order to implement it on a large scale, there will be a need for huge forest areas and this at a time when the demand for agricultural areas is increasing. Therefore, the applicability of the BECCS on a large scale is questionable.

In a world where there is constant competition for land areas, any method of "negative emission" of DTP must compete with agricultural and settlement requirements, or alternately it will turn into land robbery on a "biblical" scale and as such will cause damage to biological diversity and even more damage to indigenous rights.

Already today, huge areas of forest containing a rare and rich biological diversity are being converted to industrial use, whether through felling and agricultural development, or through By me "Green" attempts to use as biological energy. The result is that areas that were forests are neither green nor sustainable,

That's why a different/new approach is needed, no more huge areas that will annex DTP as an industry, but an approach that takes into account the biological diversity, the environment and the human beings that live in it. Therefore you canן Because the correct method for stopping greenhouse gas emissions and slowing down warming would be "back to nature".

In a survey conducted on By me The Stockholm Environmental Institute found that: "If natural forests that have been cut down and wooded areas that have been damaged are allowed to regenerate, the healed areas will be able to "imprison" 330 billion tons of DTP. It is indeed an approach that will annex a smaller amount than the requested 500, but it is much more sustainable and as such will continue to be effective for a long time.

For example: 25 years ago, a rainforest area was declared in Guatemala which was the largest in Central America. Contrary to the opinion of the conservation authorities, the government set aside areas where native populations were allowed to cut down a few trees, it turned out that in the reserved areas the forest was damaged By me Criminals, herdsmen and others, while in areas given to the natives they see the forest as theirs and therefore protect it jealously from "tree criminals",

So the forest in these areas was preserved, and the damage was only 5%, while in areas not controlled by the natives, the forest loses huge areas. The conclusion is that those who try to take over forest areas for the purpose of adsorbing DTP must recognize the rights of the forest dwellers and the fact that they are the ones who protect the forest and thus mitigate global warming.

After all this, it must be remembered that we have already passed the symbolic limit of 400 parts per million. The warming continues and increases, and the first to suffer from it are the inhabitants of the poor countries, therefore solutions for the adsorption of DTP, no matter how good, effective and practical they are, will not prevent the damages in the near future.

These days, representatives of 193 countries that are signatories to the "Paris Agreement" are gathering in Marrakesh (Morocco) to decide on ways, means and initiatives to mitigate the warming and to implement the decisions in the Paris Agreement from which there was a commitment to divert a billion for the purpose of reducing emissions and stopping the warming. A significant portion of this amount must be diverted as aid to the poor countries for warming preparations and damage prevention initiatives.