An ongoing study of Kenya over the last 25 years shows that the once rain-soaked country has dried up and warmed over the course of a decade. The country has dried to the point that hydroelectric plants no longer provide power, leading to massive blackouts, loss of crops, and displacing thousands of people.
[quote]In the last 15 years 200,000 hectares of the Mau Forest in western Kenya have been converted to agricultural land. Previously called a “water tower” because it supplied water to the Rift Valley and Lake Victoria, the forest region has dried up; in 2009 the rainy season—from August to November—saw no rain, and since then precipitation has been modest. Whereas hydropower used to provide the bulk of Kenya’s power ongoing droughts have led investors to pull out of hydro projects; power rationing and epic blackouts are common. In a desperate move to halt environmental disaster by reducing population pressure, the Kenyan government evicted tens of thousands of people from the land.[/quote]
The studies author contends that not only is this a clear example of man-made climate change, but it validates a theory that massive deforestation is just as devastating to climate as atmospheric CO2.
[quote]Severe drought, temperature extremes, formerly productive land gone barren: this is climate change. Yet, says botanist Jan Pokorny of Charles University in Prague, these snippets from Kenya are not about greenhouse gases, but rather the way that land-use changes—specifically deforestation—affect climate; newly tree-free ground “represents huge amounts of solar energy changed into sensible heat, i.e. hot air.” Pokorny, who uses satellite technology to measure changes in land-surface and temperatures, has done research in western Kenya for 25 years, and watched the area grow hotter and drier. The change from forest cover to bare ground leads to more heat and drought, he says. More than half the country used to be forested; it's now less than 2 percent.[/quote]
The biotic pump theory says that forests naturally produce a vacuum that suck air in from surrounding areas. For locations near an ocean, the air being pulled in might be very moist, bringing increased rainfall. Once the forest is gone the moist air is no longer being pulled in, and can ultimately lead to a loss of rainfall.
[quote] The "biotic pump" theory argues that natural forests act as a “pump” that draws moisture inland. According to this concept, first described in a 2007 paper by Russian physicists Victor Gorshkov and Anastassia Makarieva of the Saint Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute in the peer-reviewed Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, condensation, rather than temperature differential, is a primary driver of weather.
Here's a snapshot of the concept: The concentration of trees in wooded areas means a high rate of transpiration. This moist air cools as it ascends and the water vapor condenses, producing a partial vacuum. This creates an air pressure gradient, whereby the forest canopy sucks in moist air from the ocean. According to Gorshkov and Makarieva, forests don't merely grow in wet areas, they create and perpetuate the conditions in which they grow. Without forest cover—specifically mature, natural forest to ensure sufficient biomass and resilience—moisture is no longer pulled in, the physicists say. Rain becomes erratic and ultimately stalls.[/quote]
If this theory is correct, as study of Kenya's climate suggests, the damage done from massive deforestation is worse than previously thought.
English
#Offtopic
-
1 返信It took these, "experts" this long to figure out that mass deforestation is bad for the world climate?
-
1 返信If there's one thing we're good at as a species, it's destroying our own environment. Sometimes I can only see humanity as a parasite swarming all over the Earth.
-
Obi Wan Stevobiにより編集済み: 3/4/2013 5:36:49 PM[url=http://www.bioticregulation.ru/pump/pump9.php#02]Here is an interesting note that suggests you need natural, mature forests, rather than a plantation.[/url] I wonder how well the practices in my own state would help there. Here in Northern MN, everything is forest. Forestry is a decent part of our economy here. We produce lumber, biomass for heating, and a lot of it becomes pulp for the paper industry. There are a few different methods of logging here. One is selective, where only a subset of valuable trees is removed, leaving the forest mainly intact. We also clear cut, but do so in small, rotating chunks so that area of the forest has grown back by the time you get back to cutting it. So we do maintain some older growth forest, and the forest remains relatively natural. Paper companies prefer plantation. They prefer specific tree species and plant massive plantations of spruce and poplar. While these trees are natural to the area, their configuration is not, and over the years have been selected and genetically modified to grow much faster than normal. I wonder if those trees maintain a natural moisture balance in the soil that is needed for this pump effect, or if more selective logging can maintain that balance. If so, there could be a way for industry and environment to get along.
-
3 通の返信Wouldn't a simple solution be to just plant a whole lot of new trees, and then prohibit them from being cut down? Because that sounds like it would work.
-
1 返信Circadian Wolfにより編集済み: 3/4/2013 4:32:32 PMExperts are only just working this out? I was preaching this shit since secondary school, it doesn't take a genius to work out forests take in more moisture.
-
2 通の返信Im no expert but Ive seen a bunch of science channel/youtube stuff on this. I remember seeing a show talking about cities like Vegas and New York considering methods of reducing Cooling Costs for buildings and over all temperatures in the area. Since they having lots of Parking-lots and Building tops which naturally absorb and trap the suns the suns energy essentially super heating the local area and structure. The solution they proposed was to plant gardens on top of these surfaces, because it would Better insulate the building, letting it hold onto the cold air from air conditioners, and reduce the need for air conditioners since the buildings wouldnt be as hot, and since the plants were much better at reflecting and absorbing the suns energy the area would be cooler. So to apply this to Kenya, If they originally had a Forest reducing the heat and holding the moisture, and then they got rid of it. the ground would essentially act like the parking lots and building tops of a City, trapping the suns energy and super heating the area. Which is not an environment that would invite cool more humid air, if it is constantly radiating heat.
-
1 返信Deforestation is VERY bad. Trees remove carbon from the atmosphere. Free carbon causes global warming.