Amazon Nears 'Tipping Point' Where Rainforest Could Transform Into Savanna 70
If deforestation continues, the Amazon rainforest could reach a critical tipping point where most of it transforms into a dry savanna, a new study warns. Live Science reports: The study, published Monday in the journal Nature Climate Change, suggests that more than 75% of the rainforest has steadily lost "resilience" since the 2000s, meaning those portions of the rainforest now can't recover as easily from disturbances, such as droughts and wildfires. Regions of the rainforest that show the most profound losses in resilience are located near farms, urban areas and areas used for logging, Inside Climate News reported. Climate change, rampant deforestation and burnings conducted for agriculture and ranching have left the Amazon far warmer and drier than in decades past, and since 2000, the region has endured three major droughts, The New York Times reported.
By examining satellite images taken between 1991 and 2016, the researchers determined how long the rainforest took to bounce back after such events, The Guardian reported. The researchers determined that, since the turn of the 21st century, the rainforest has been taking longer and longer to recover biomass, meaning the mass of living trees and other vegetation, after droughts and fires. "That lack of resilience shows that, indeed, there is only so much of a beating that this forest can take," Paulo Brando, a tropical ecologist at the University of California, Irvine who was not involved in the study, told The New York Times. If the rainforests surpasses this tipping point, the ecosystem could swiftly change into a vast savanna, unleashing tens of billions of tons of carbon dioxide during the transformation, The Guardian reported.
At this point, can anything be done to prevent the Amazon rainforest from turning into the Amazon savanna? Experts say there is. "These systems are highly resilient, and the fact that we have reduced resilience doesn't mean that it has lost all its resilience," Brando told the Times. "If you leave them alone for a little bit, they come back super strongly." But it requires key steps to be taken, experts said. "We have to get to zero deforestation, zero forest degradation," Carlos Nobre, a senior scientist at the National Institute of Amazonian Research in Brazil, who was not involved in the study, told the Times. "We still have a chance to save the forest."
By examining satellite images taken between 1991 and 2016, the researchers determined how long the rainforest took to bounce back after such events, The Guardian reported. The researchers determined that, since the turn of the 21st century, the rainforest has been taking longer and longer to recover biomass, meaning the mass of living trees and other vegetation, after droughts and fires. "That lack of resilience shows that, indeed, there is only so much of a beating that this forest can take," Paulo Brando, a tropical ecologist at the University of California, Irvine who was not involved in the study, told The New York Times. If the rainforests surpasses this tipping point, the ecosystem could swiftly change into a vast savanna, unleashing tens of billions of tons of carbon dioxide during the transformation, The Guardian reported.
At this point, can anything be done to prevent the Amazon rainforest from turning into the Amazon savanna? Experts say there is. "These systems are highly resilient, and the fact that we have reduced resilience doesn't mean that it has lost all its resilience," Brando told the Times. "If you leave them alone for a little bit, they come back super strongly." But it requires key steps to be taken, experts said. "We have to get to zero deforestation, zero forest degradation," Carlos Nobre, a senior scientist at the National Institute of Amazonian Research in Brazil, who was not involved in the study, told the Times. "We still have a chance to save the forest."
Re: (Score:2)
Actually the Amazon is being burned and clearcut mainly for farming and cattle pasture, not mining. And plenty of people care about it.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.... [nasa.gov]
Re: (Score:1)
Watching and even measuring harm happen, and taking steps to prevent it, are two entirely separate things that ignorance will learn.
After it's too late.
Don't worry. Humanity was this stupid and ignorant before too. It's not like you're any different. Or smarter.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Naw, the problem is that our capacity to care is outdone by Bolsonaro ability to not care.
No, the problem is "our" capacity, against one man. I had to look up who "Bolsonaro" is. Now imagine a couple billion other humans having to do that in order to validate your point. Talk about irrelevant in the big picture of humanity.
You either take action, or deal with what Greed takes. It's that simple. Has been for thousands of years, so don't even pretend this bullshit is "new".
Re: (Score:2)
I had to look up who "Bolsonaro" is.
Bolsonaro is the Trump of Brazil.
Jair Bolsonaro [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
He's worse. He's got all the malevolence but five times the competence and life expectancy. This is still not very much competence, though.
Re: (Score:3)
I had to look up who "Bolsonaro" is.
Even occasional browsing of the international news summaries would have informed you of who that guy is. You must live pretty deep underneath that rock of yours.
Re: (Score:2)
If that is the case, then you don't have much business posting a comment in a story about the Amazon rainforest. If you don't know who the bombastic, retrograde, and jackass-general president of Brazil is, who has been in power for over three years, then I question your general knowledge of the world, let alone your qualifications to speak about the Amazon.
Re: (Score:2)
We are going to have to figure out how to reverse stuff like this. We can't stop it, it's already too late. Not just deforestation, greenhouse gas emissions too.
While decarbonizing is important, we really need technologies that can remove CO2. That could involve massive reforestation programmes, but alone those won't be enough.
Re: (Score:2)
The first step for positive change in Brazil is to remove Bolsonaro by whatever means are necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps he can be used to fertilise some trees?
Re: (Score:2)
What's with all the nasty remarks? And you don't know jack shit about me or anyone else here.
Re: (Score:2)
What's with all the nasty remarks? And you don't know jack shit about me or anyone else here.
I wasn't referring to you, selfish one. We're here talking about sustaining the planet. The fuck else would we be talking about a "rainforest" in the middle of nowhere for.
To be clear, I was referring to human fallacy. Sure, you can argue against that fact, but you would only be proving my point.
Re: (Score:2)
You responded to my comment, and I replied. At this point I have zero interest in your blabbering.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're likely seeing offence where none was intended.
Re: (Score:2)
Emo kids grew up to be emo adults. Too many people are just cynics that see everything as terrible and the sky is falling despite quality of life for the average person being better today that virtually any other time in history. Yes we have problems, but very few people today would willing switch places with a medieval peasant, or a worker who built either the Great Wall or the Pyramids.
Try to fix the problems sure, but for goodness sakes people you only live once; don't spend your existence moaning that
Re: (Score:2)
Emo kids grew up to be emo adults. Too many people are just cynics that see everything as terrible and the sky is falling despite quality of life for the average person being better today that virtually any other time in history. Yes we have problems, but very few people today would willing switch places with a medieval peasant, or a worker who built either the Great Wall or the Pyramids.
Virtually any other time in history? Mind explaining why you were forced to skip over the last half-century in order to find the "horrible" examples to prove your point then? Sadly, I feel my grandfather fared better than today's generation. And he was subjected to war drafts.
Not every generation is perfect, but every generation is certainly human, and has demonstrated that fallacy throughout time. Some far worse than others, as we're seeing today. Weak men, make hard times. And "modern" society has
Re: (Score:2)
don't spend your existence moaning that the world isn't perfect.
Moaning doesn't help, but taking action does. The rainforest is at risk because of CO2 levels and clearing for cattle pasture. I drive an EV, have solar on my roof, and I don't eat beef. None of that makes my life less enjoyable.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
If you are going to use a quote in your signature, you should at least attribute it properly. Mark Twain never said that. It is a quote by Isaac Asimov.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Looks to me like small subsistence farmers. From my link;
"Legal and illegal roads penetrate a remote part of the forest, and small farmers migrate to the area. They claim land along the road and clear some of it for crops. Within a few years, heavy rains and erosion deplete the soil, and crop yields fall. Farmers then convert the degraded land to cattle pasture, and clear more forest for crops. "
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
And ethanol fuel. They are cutting down the rain forest so they can grow sugarcane for ethanol fuel.
Take your pick, fossil fuels, economic ruin, or nuclear power. Electric cars won't get Brazil out of the need to cut down trees to grow fuel crops because that electricity has to come from something. Offshore windmills are an option but that just brings a different kind of environmental damage and economic ruin.
If you tree huggers want to see Brazil stop cutting down trees then we need nuclear power plants
Re: (Score:2)
Totally nuts, Brazil has plenty of wind and sun. Meanwhile nuclear has been a failure there.
https://world-nuclear.org/info... [world-nuclear.org]
"At present, construction of Angra 3 is suspended. In March 2017 the government announced that it planned to sell Angra 3 by 2018. The deputy energy minister said that Russian and Chinese investors had expressed interest"
Re: (Score:2)
The French, the Swedes, the Koreans, and my area of New York do.
Re: (Score:3)
There are problems with recycling paper as well, but that's another discussion. For the purposes of this one, the discussion is about the quality of oxygen and of carbon sinks, which while invisible, are things that I for one care about.
Re: (Score:2)
If they are invisible, then you better prepare for Greed to make it extinct if it happens to be in the way of feeding Greed.
Otherwise, make it visible, because no one cares.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The only reason you suppose no one lives in the rainforests is A) nobody talks about it on the evening news, or B) you are not aware that the Amazon was entirely *planted* by its millions of residents, 95% of them killed off by European Germs in the 1500's 1600's. See 1493 book by Charles Mann and Dawn of everything by Graeber and Wengrow.
Re: (Score:1)
The only reason you suppose no one lives in the rainforests is A) nobody talks about it on the evening news, or B) you are not aware that the Amazon was entirely *planted* by its millions of residents, 95% of them killed off by European Germs in the 1500's 1600's. See 1493 book by Charles Mann and Dawn of everything by Graeber and Wengrow.
Ah, so it wasn't even the usual human warmongering that made this land worthless hundreds of years ago. Mother Nature tried to drive humans away.
If 95% of people were killed off in a region of the world, I'd probably find more of a welcome living inside the Chernobyl exclusion zone.
And quite frankly, it's been thirty fucking years of OMGWTF warnings regarding rainforest deforestation. Either take action to actually protect it, or kindly shut the fuck up. Our fucking moon, has more protection from Greed.
Re: (Score:2)
It would be good if people did protect it. About half of the deforested area really needs to get replanted in the next 10-20 years, the consequences of losing a rainforest on that scale would make the climate hell we're living through now seem like paradise.
Re: (Score:2)
that the Amazon was entirely *planted* by its millions of residents, 95% of them killed off by European Germs in the 1500's 1600's
Note that these are still somewhat controversial hypotheses, despite the fact that they appeared in popular books.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As hard as this may be for you to believe, much as criminals are incapable of believing anyone to genuinely be honest...
Yes, and ironically you fail to understand why that is. Criminals often have considerable experience dealing with humans. Also known as liars.
...some of us can see further than the tips of our noses. Some of us actually do care about the future habitability of the only place known to harbor life.
I noticed that out of 7 billion humans, only a few of them are living in the "only place known to harbor life", so grain of salt. Go figure.
Re: (Score:2)
God you're fucking stupid. He's talking about the entire planet, you moron!
I stand corrected, but it's irrelevant. The Disease of Greed has infected humanity for thousands of years. We're hopelessly addicted to it, so it doesn't matter who "truly" cares about the planet (as the undying hypocrite makes zero personal sacrifices, mind you). We'll still extinct ourselves right here on this dying rock, forever addicted to Greed. Sadly, the inexplicable artifacts we're pulling out of the sand that suggest a previous "modern" society existed, tends to hint that we've done it before.
Let's see. (Score:2)
First, yes, people do live there.
Second, you really don't seem to grasp this concept of a system. None of your data lives in your PSU/battery, but if you rip that out, you might possibly notice.
Third, if you believe in the impact only after it has happened, there's bugger all you can do about it.
Last, if you think that reality gives a shit about beliefs, you really don't grasp much of it.
Dry Amazon (Score:2)
I absolutely hate that my initial impression of this article was one of some plight the bookseller had encountered.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm no vegan. It doesn't take a genius to know that most soy beans go to feed livestock. The biggest soy eaters are the animals we eat.
https://ussoy.org/uses-for-soy... [ussoy.org]
Uhm, wrong RSS feed? (Score:2)
Amazon on Slashdot usually refers to Jeff Bezos's retail and streaming empire...
amazon should buy the amazon (Score:2)
and turn it into Jeff Bezos personal nature preserve.
Re: amazon should buy the amazon (Score:2)
Brazil election coming up, Lula leads (Score:2)
https://www.thebureauinvestiga... [thebureaui...igates.com]
Re: (Score:2)
that Ukrainians "placed the hope of their nation in the hands of a comedian."
Is it worse than putting it in the hands of a politician?
Brando is right, but also very wrong (Score:2)
There are 'old growth' forrests in Columbia that were grasslands 400 years ago, so while he's right correctthem becoming savannah, he's not correct about them staying that way.
"We still have a chance to save the forest." (Score:2)
Sure, if the planet gives up its unsustainable desire for beef, mostly in the form of hamburgers.
I'm not saying fast food is entirely responsible for this, but it does seem reasonably evident that around 60,000 outlets from the world's two biggest fast food companies isn't going to do much to help.
On a social level, going purely on anecdotal evidence - because that's all I really have to use - eating beef every day has become completely normalised.
It's been that way for ages. I've lost count of the amount o
Re: (Score:1)
I'm just going to live in a concrete paved city, surrounded by my tech and my 'intellectual' friends. I will naturally exclude my bizarre existence from 'The Environment'. I will eat the most processed foods available. I will drink the most processed beverages that exist. I will point out to those smelly flyover people in the Midwest what the 'best' farming methods are and what I think they should be doing. I will tell them how they are in various animal's 'territory'. I won't ever recognize that NYC, Bosto
So, how's that sugarcane ethanol working? (Score:1)
All this talk of how we can power the world with wind, sun, water, and ethanol made from sugarcane is coming crashing down. You want to see destruction of the Amazon forest? Sugarcane ethanol is how you get destruction of the Amazon forest.
Electric cars won't save the forest because that electricity has to come from somewhere. Offshore windmills maybe? Sure, that only costs more than nuclear power. That also has environmental impacts.
Shipping in energy from some other nation is how we got Russia invadi
Re: (Score:2)
Electric cars won't save the forest because that electricity has to come from somewhere.
So even if the electricity was generated by nuclear, it wouldn't help.
Offshore windmills maybe? Sure, that only costs more than nuclear power.
You keep asking for people to provide you with updated information on this so you can use it. We have. You don't.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/new-nuclear-power-in-uk-would-be-the-worlds-most-costly-says-report
Slightly old - UK cost for nuclear £90/MWh.
Same time period, offshore wind: https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/p... [energy-uk.org.uk]
£97/MWh. So already almost a tie.
https://www.resilience.org/stories/2020-09-02/wind-and-solar-are-30-5
Re: (Score:1)
A report from 2015 is not "updated".
I ask for new information when I've given reports from 2020
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Well the Lazard numbers are interesting but I've been told to ignore Lazard, perhaps because they give natural gas such good numbers.
Offshore wind, costs more than nuclear power.
Rooftop solar, costs more than nuclear power.
Utility scale solar, that takes cutting down trees.
onshore wind, Excellent.
geothermal, excellent.
nuclear fission , excellent.
Hydro, excellent.
Yes, I want update
Re: So, how's that sugarcane ethanol working? (Score:2)
Great job, Brazil... (Score:2)
Illegal slash-and-burn farming, illegal logging - Brazil makes a show of combatting this stuff, but actually tolerates it. A little grease on the right palm, leave a piece of broken equipment behind, so they can film the enforcers destroying it, and everything is good. It doesn't look like this is going to change anytime soon. So, savanna.
The loss of biodiversity will be sad, when it happens. However, for the planet as a whole, it's probably a shrug. Rain forests are not big carbon sinks. Rainfall pattern
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, we should just start preparing for this as it's impossible to avoid. And by preparing I mean just build a wall around Brazil so that when it's all dried up they stay there instead of fleeing to other countries. Unlike Ukraine they brought this on themselves so they should deal with it by themselves.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Where does his fresh water come from? Will it still be there when the jungle turns into savanna? Learning about ecosystems is not a bad thing you know...
Re: (Score:2)
https://abcnews.go.com/Interna... [go.com]
Re: (Score:1)
That rich couple that reserved forest in Chile (Score:2)
Who was that couple, guy passed away in old age I think now, that had some clothing company and bought a huge amount of land in Chile... then donated it to the local government with stipulations of protecting it and leaving it a national forest or something.
We need more of that!
These guys I think: https://www.cnn.com/travel/art... [cnn.com]