Skip to content

Pacquiao makes the grade

first_imgSports Related Videospowered by AdSparcRead Next It might be an indication that Vargas got dehydrated as he tried to bring his weight down this week, a day before he dangles the World Boxing Organization crown against Pacquiao, who has a perennial problem that other boxers would like to have.READ: Pacquiao fights Jessie Vargas in bout that’s a tough sellSo as not to become malnourished during training camp, Pacquiao has to eat huge amount of food four times a day to bulk up a bit, perhaps 147 to 148 pounds on fight night, according to chief trainer Freddie Roach.Vargas, according to trainer Dewey Cooper, will likely climb to 154 pounds so as not to impede his speed and keep his power.While the protagonists in the headliner breezed through the weigh-in, those in the undercard seemed to have struggled in the battle of the bulge.ADVERTISEMENT Manny Pacquiao, left, of the Philippines, and Jessie Vargas pose during a weigh-in, Friday, Nov. 4, 2016, in Las Vegas. The two are scheduled to fight in a welterweight title bout Saturday in Las Vegas. (AP Photo/John Locher)LAS VEGAS–When Manny Pacquiao stepped into the weighing scale, the predominantly Filipino crowd that came to watch the official weigh-in of The Legend vs The Champ at Encore Theater turned silent for a moment Friday afternoon.They waited anxiously, then applauded when it was announced that Pacquiao was just 144.8 pounds, well within the 147-pound limit of the welterweight division.ADVERTISEMENT READ: Pacquiao likes to give more than he receivesNonito “Filipino Flash” Donaire Jr. appeared pale as he weighed 121.8 pounds, slightly heavier that that of Magdaleno, who checked in at 121.25.After the weigh-in, Pacquiao proceeded to his suite at Wynn and started his weight-gaining binge by eating chicken kebab, bulalo and beef steak for breakfast.He had a lot to make up for as 144.8 was his second lightest since climbing to the welterweight division.READ: Pacquiao eager to reclaim WBO welterweight titlePacquiao only hit 143.5 when he fought against Chris Algieri, who weighed 143.6, in Macau two years ago.The weigh-in turned out to be a global affair as the boxers were plucked out from different parts of the world.Mexican Oscar Valdez will stake his clean slate (21-0, 18 KOs) and WBO feaherweight title against Japanese Hiroshige Osawa (30-3-4, 19 KOs) while Chinese pride Zou Shiming (8-1, 2 KOs) will dispute the vacant WBO fyweight crown against Thai Prasitak Phaprom (39-1-2, 24 KOs).Also represented were Brazil (Robson Conceicao), Russia (Alexander Besputin), and Panama (Azael Cosio). —Brought to you by: Café Puro MOST READ Smart hosts first 5G-powered esports exhibition match in PH EDITORS’ PICK We are young BREAKING: Solicitor General asks SC to forfeit ABS CBN’s franchise Taiwan minister boards cruise ship turned away by Japan PLAY LIST 01:31Taiwan minister boards cruise ship turned away by Japan01:33WHO: ‘Global stocks of masks and respirators are now insufficient’01:01WHO: now 31,211 virus cases in China 102:02Vitamin C prevents but doesn’t cure diseases like coronavirus—medic03:07’HINDI PANG-SPORTS LANG!’03:03SILIP SA INTEL FUND Brad Pitt wins his first acting Oscar as awards get underway Pacquiao gives away $1 million on tickets Smart’s Siklab Saya: A multi-city approach to esports The champion, Jessie Vargas, checked-in next and was listed at 146.5.READ: Bradley: Vargas not on Pacquiao’s levelFEATURED STORIESSPORTSGinebra teammates show love for SlaughterSPORTSWe are youngSPORTSCone plans to speak with Slaughter, agentIt was expected as Vargas towers over the 5-foot-6 Pacquiao by four inches.As soon as Vargas’ turn was over, an associate handed him a bottle of hydrating drink which he gulped down right away. View comments PH among economies most vulnerable to virus Where did they go? Millions left Wuhan before quarantine Mainland China virus cases exceed 40,000; deaths rise to 908 30 Filipinos from Wuhan quarantined in Capas Chinese-manned vessel unsettles Bohol town Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. last_img read more

Cerrado farm community fights for life against dam and eucalyptus growers

first_imgArticle published by Glenn Scherer A wealth of great rivers caused Brazil in recent years to pursue a frenzy of mega-dam construction in the Amazon and Cerrado, work that enthusiasts claimed would benefit Brazilians with cheap energy. Critics say otherwise, however, noting much of the power produced goes to large mining company operations.Analysts also point to completed projects, such as the Belo Monte, Teles Pires, Santo Antonio, Jirau and other dams, that have resulted in significant environmental harm, the displacement of rural indigenous and traditional populations, and to generating massive corruption.A case in point can be found in the small town of Formosa in Tocantins state. The building of the Estreito mega-dam, completed in 2008, flooded fields, pastures and homes. The most impacted half of the community was relocated by the consortium of companies that constructed the dam.The rest remained and were denied the social and economic benefits they’d been promised by either the government or the dam building consortium, which includes two mining giants, Alcoa and Vale, and Suez Energy and Camargo Corrêa Energia. Many Brazilian mega-dams were planned to offer energy to large mines. Aerial view of the Estreito dam on the Tocantins river. Formosa residents are still waiting to be given compensation promised them by the dam-building consortium and the government. Image by Cleber Magri licensed under a CC 4.0 license.This is the seventh in a series by journalist Anna Sophie Gross who traveled to the Brazilian states of Tocantins and Maranhão in Legal Amazonia for Mongabay to assess the impacts of agribusiness on the region’s environment and people.FORMOSA, Tocantins, Brazil – The tiny settlement, or rather, what remains of it, sits on the border between Maranhão and Tocantins state, and it is steeped in a history of conflict. Its sixty families, now diminished to 29, have fought the government, a consortium of mining and energy companies, and local eucalyptus plantations for more than a decade to keep the rights to a parcel of land that they can till and live upon.Founded in 2002 with a valid land deed, Formosa had roughly four good years in which to cultivate crops, rear livestock, put down roots and weave together a strong community fabric based upon friendship and mutual dependency.In 2007, the Formosa families were suddenly confronted with an existential threat to their homes and livelihoods.Despite great protest from people in the region and environmental activists, the Estreito hydroelectric dam was built on the Tocantins River, just 40 kilometers (25 miles) downstream from Formosa.Some speculate that the dam was built primarily to provide electricity to mining operations, though officially the energy is distributed to the national grid. Either way, its reservoir filled and flooded half of Formosa’s titled territory. In 2008, the year the dam went operational, thirty of the families were relocated by the consortium of mining companies that constructed the dam and profit from it to this day. Those whose homes were not directly flooded, but who lost farmland, remained.“We lost our friends, but we also lost access to water [and] to the areas we used to plant crops and to the river beach,” explained Maria Helena de Souza, the community’s leader.Before the dam, Formosa’s river beach had been a popular destination for local people who gathered there to swim and lounge on sunny days. That afforded the community with a business opportunity, selling fruit and snacks to the beachgoers. Local women would also pluck nuts from babaçu trees near the river shore and make oil, which they’d sell locally.The beach and all the babaçu were drowned by the dam’s reservoir, washing away two steady streams of income.Maria Helena de Souza, Formosa’s leader, looks out over the land that has been flooded by the Estreito dam: “We lost our friends, but we also lost access to water [and] to the areas we used to plant crops and to the river beach.” Image by Thomas Bauer.Babacu trees flooded in the Formosa community. Local women used to pluck nuts from babaçu trees near the river shore and make oil, which they’d sell locally. The babaçu trees were drowned by the dam’s reservoir, washing away a steady stream of community income. Image by Thomas Bauer.Unkept pledgesThe relocated were taken to new homes 150 kilometers (93 miles) away. Those that remained in Formosa were promised the same amenities that their departed friends had received – clean drinking water, proper sanitation, improved access roads. But it has been a decade since the dam became operational; nothing has materialized.The initial reparations agreement was made between the community and the Consortium of Hydroelectric Energy in Estreito (CESTE) – the coalition of energy companies that built the dam – and the federal National Institute of Colonization and Agrarian Reform (INCRA).“We received nothing, nothing, nothing. Not money, or the services they promised they would provide,” said de Souza. She pointed to a water pump that it took CESTE 5 years to install but which has never functioned.“They had the nerve to try to host an inauguration ceremony for the pump, but we wouldn’t let them celebrate something that doesn’t work,” she said. That was four years ago, and since then no one has come to repair the broken pump.The reason for the stalemate comes in the form of a disagreement over whose responsibility it is to provide Formosa with its guaranteed reparations. The superintendent of INCRA in Tocantins, Carlos Alberto da Costa, flatly denies INCRA’s accountability: “It is CESTE’s responsibility to supply all of these things,” he said. “It’s not our responsibility to make CESTE hold up their end of the agreement.”But CESTE told Mongabay a different story, stating that it did not have any responsibility for the promises made within the agreement. “We note that the implementation of the UHE ESTREITO [dam] occurred with absolute dialogue and respect for the community and government institutions,” CESTE representatives said.However, it seems likely that both government and consortium share in the responsibility. In the case of other Brazilian mega-dams, such as with Belo Monte on the Xingu River, it is the dam building consortium that is accountable for paying reparations, while it is the government’s responsibility under the law to make sure that happens.But at Formosa, the deadlock remains, and the community suffers on, mostly in silence and so far without legal recourse.A Formosa neighbor, 73 year-old eucalyptus farmer Ataide Vas do Santos, seen inside one of his plantations. “The eucalyptus hasn’t had any effect on communities around here,” he says. But Formosa residents tell a different story, of extreme water shortages due to the trees’ excessive water use and pesticide-contaminated streams. Image by Thomas Bauer.Enter the speculators The dam’s reservoir is just one of Formosa’s survival worries. Large eucalyptus plantations, “green deserts” devoid of biodiversity, and an egg farm, surround the community today.And there is no shortage of entrepreneurial representatives looking to buy up the settlement’s remaining land along the river to gain access to irrigation water. Many residents have received low purchase offers from agribusiness – tempting nonetheless for those whose subsistence livelihoods and sources of income have been deeply curtailed by the dam.“Our quality of life here’s gotten so bad, which means more and more people are thinking of selling out and moving on,” said de Souza. “It’s weakening us.”The village leader still dreams of a future where Formosa will regain its vibrancy and culture. She hopes that the community will someday be able to build a school to provide its young people with education and hope. She also yearns for a working water pump so residents no longer need to drink polluted river water.The Estreito dam and reservoir. Completed in 2008, the dam flooded fields, pastures and homes. The most impacted half of the Formosa community was relocated by the consortium of companies that constructed the dam, but the rest goes uncompensated for the reservoir’s flooding. Image by Thomas Bauer.How the dam came to beAnyone crossing the President Juscelino Kubistchek bridge over the Tocantins River six years ago would have seen a much more pastoral scene. Where once there was forest and a few scattered homes, now stands one of the biggest hydroelectric complexes in Brazil, generating 1,087 megawatts (MW).But the construction of the Estreito dam didn’t only change the look of the countryside. It also changed the character of the nearby city of Estreito, as hotels, restaurants, gas stations, a concert hall and other amenities sprang up to meet the demands of newly arrived construction workers, there to build the dam, transmission lines, roads and other infrastructure.It had all begun with a lengthy federal bidding process. Then, on July 12, 2002, Suez Energy, Camargo Corrêa Energia, Vale and Alcoa – two of the world’s mining giants – were awarded the lucrative hydroelectric project. The companies organized the CESTE consortium, which planned and constructed the Estreito Dam, and which operates and profits from it today.A railroad track, built for freight transport in 2010, cut straight through Formosa, causing further community disruption. Formosa leader Maria Helena de Souza stands on the trestle. Behind her are dead Babacu trees and drowned community lands: “Our quality of life here’s gotten so bad, which means more and more people are thinking of selling out and moving on. It’s weakening us.” Image by Thomas Bauer.A business-biased building process?Some commentators have identified troubling aspects to the construction on this, the biggest, high-impact energy project of its kind in Maranhão state.In a doctoral thesis, Adila Maria Taveira de Lima, of the Federal University of Tocantins, writes that the building process “was marked by the [consortium’s] rush to finish the work and obtain return on investment.” She adds that this haste resulted in “extreme government influence being used to expedite the work and put pressure on licensing bodies to issue licenses.” All consortiums awarded large federal infrastructure construction projects are compelled under the law to conduct socio-environmental impact assessments, which require the full participation and input of potentially impacted communities.However, de Lima says that CESTE’s negotiation meetings were barely participatory. Instead, the consortium cherry-picked supportive representatives from each group of impacted parties, rather than allowing the groups to self-select their own representatives. She concludes that final “decisions reached the affected communities without [residents] having the opportunity to make any significant changes.”According to another qualitative study conducted in 2012 by Amarildo Silva Araujo, also from Tocantins Federal University, local communities endured a wide range of negative impacts caused by the dam – among them, the death and displacement of thousands of animals, cost of living increases, as well as micro-climatic disturbances.The study author writes that all of his interviewees felt they were “significantly impacted by the establishment of the Estreito Hydroelectric Power Plant, and point out that none of the impacts were properly monitored by those in charge of construction.”Silva Araujo concludes that the environmental impact assessment carried out ahead of construction failed to adequately anticipate the social and environmental harm that the dam would cause, and that there were serious failures on CESTE’s part to uphold reparations commitments made to river-dwelling populations.Such failings, say critics, are a hallmark of Brazilian mega-dam projects, with similar accusations launched against the Belo Monte dam on the Xingu River, the Santo Antonio and Jirau dams on the Madeira River, a series of dams on the Teles Pires River, and others.CESTE presents a different picture, celebrating its positive impact in Maranhão. In a statement sent to Mongabay, the company said that the consortium invested more than $75 million reals  (US $20 million) in projects to improve social and health infrastructure in the region, and that 90 percent of its dealings with homeowners who were impacted by the dam were “conducted in a friendly manner.”The consortium also claims that the construction of the dam generated 10,000 jobs, albeit temporary ones. CESTE does admit that now that the dam is operational, the hydroelectric project employs just 300 personnel.An aerial view of the train track that cuts directly through Formosa and which is used to transport steel across Brazil. Image by Thomas Bauer.Damming the Cerrado to support miningA series of huge hydroelectric dams have already been built along the Parnaiba, Tocantins, and Estreito rivers in Maranhão – the Brazilian state with the second lowest GDP in the nation.Plans for six new dams on the Tocantins River, means that Maranhão is poised to become among the highest energy producing states in all of Brazil, ultimately generating 11.6 million MW, almost ten times the amount the state currently uses.Maranhão presently consumes just 1.5 million megawatts, including that generated by the Estreito dam. But according to Araujo’s research, almost two thirds of that amount is utilized by a single corporate enterprise – the Alumar Consortium, which refines and sells aluminum and is made up of three major transnational mining companies, Alcoa, South 32 and Alcan. It’s important to note that Alcoa is also one of the main companies in the CESTE consortium. The mining and processing of aluminum requires a tremendous amount of energy, so the proposed new dams seem intended to serve a potential massive increase in bauxite mining and aluminum processing.“There are studies which show that dams have been constructed to produce energy specifically for certain major industries,” said Dernival Ramos Junior, Professor of History, Society and Territory at the Federal University of Tocantins.He explained that the popular view that mega-dams bring economic development to the nation and benefits to the general population is a potent one with the Brazilian populace, but that it is “simply untrue.” He adds that, “The option to construct dams is political, and is very tied to the interests of big corporations.”According to CESTE’s website, the Estreito dam has “the capacity to supply energy to a city with four million inhabitants” which “represents more energy and development for Brazil and the region where the plant is located.”However, with Maranhão shooting for a ten million megawatt surplus of hydroelectric energy over what the state consumes, it is clear that much will be exported to other states, most of them richer and unperturbed by the social and environmental impacts that these mega-projects cause to rural populations in the Cerrado. It’s also clear that much of the exported electricity would likely benefit transnational mining companies like Alcoa, or giant Brazilian mining companies like Vale. The value of these big dams to the general public is less clear.Formosa residents prepare cassava flour, a staple in the Brazilian national diet, usually served alongside beans and meat. The coming of the dam, the reservoir, the eucalyptus plantations, and the railroad have all disrupted the farming community’s livelihoods and subsistence lifestyle. Image by Thomas Bauer.The future of hydraulic power in BrazilBrazil is a land famous for its great rivers, with eight percent of the world’s freshwater found there. So it’s logical for government, industry and agribusiness to want to harness this cheap and abundant source of energy.Brazil’s first dam was built in 1889 in Minas Gerais state, though the sudden proliferation of Brazilian hydroelectric dams can be traced to the policies of President Juscelino Kubitschek (1956-61), a proponent of post-World War II industrialization.An explosion in mega-dam construction arrived in recent years, also resulting in a significant socio-environmental backlash, which even halted construction in a few ultra-controversial cases, including the defeat – at least for now – of the 8,000 MW São Luiz do Tapajós dam on the Tapajós River in the Amazon basin in 2016.There have even been whisperings of an end to the contentious mega-dam construction craze, with a shift to medium and small dams (though even these can be dangerously ecologically disruptive), and to renewable sources of energy such as wind and solar.Philip Fearnside, a specialist in Amazonian dams, isn’t hopeful. “Dams are still very much the center piece of Brazil’s electricity generation plans,” he told Mongabay. Fearnside points out that, to date, none of the dams on the government’s ten-year plan have been de-listed, while two top officials who positioned themselves against hydroelectric megaprojects resigned abruptly earlier this year.Fearnside notes that Chinese state-owned companies have been buying up Brazilian dams and transmission lines, and are negotiating for the purchase of others. Chinese investment banks and construction companies are also active in promoting major Brazilian transportation infrastructure projects, including new industrial waterways that would require dams, railways and roads, that could soon bring Brazilian commodities more easily and cheaply to Asia.There are also a host of pending legislative proposals in Congress that could massively weaken environmental licensing, making dam construction significantly easier and cheaper in the future.Among the troubling bills now in the legislature is PLS 654/2015 which calls for the creation of a fast-tracked environmental license, which would take just eight months to obtain, for infrastructure projects of “strategic importance” to the government. The strategic importance label is sufficiently vague to be slapped on a host of projects.PL 447/2012, dubbed the “Corruption Bill” by critics, would prohibit the suspension or cancellation of infrastructure projects once they have already begun, and also restrict the power of oversight bodies, such as the Public Prosecutor’s Office and even the judiciary, from intervening in cases of malpractice.Newly elected president Jair Bolsonaro, who takes office in January, has indicated his support for fast-tracking the infrastructure licensing process. Retired general Oswaldo Ferreira, in charge of infrastructure planning for Bolsonaro’s campaign, also recently suggested reopening feasibility studies for the São Luiz do Tapajós mega-dam, in Pará, and resuming analyses for proposed Amazon hydropower dams with large reservoirs. Ferreira favors wind and solar energy, but feels neither are sufficient to “keep the economy growing.”Fearnside is categorical about what he thinks needs to happen next. “Dam construction should be stopped and priority given to using less electricity,” he said. Then it is time for Brazil to shift its focus to wind and solar power. That’s a move that the residents of Formosa ­– feeling cheated out of hydropower’s promise – would almost surely applaud.Mongabay contributor Anna Sophie Gross was accompanied on her trip by Thomas Bauer, a photographer and filmmaker who has been documenting and supporting communities in the Cerrado and Amazon for over 20 years. He produced nearly all of the photos and videos for this series.FEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the author of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page. Agriculture, Agrochemicals, Amazon Agriculture, Amazon Conservation, Amazon Dams, Amazon Destruction, Amazon Mining, Amazon People, Conflict, Controversial, Corporate Environmental Transgressors, Corporate Responsibility, Corruption, Dams, electricity, Energy, Energy Politics, Environment, environmental justice, Environmental Law, Environmental Politics, Featured, Flooding, Forests, Governance, Government, Green, Hydroelectric Power, Hydropower, Industrial Agriculture, Infrastructure, Land Conflict, Land Rights, Land Use Change, Law, Mining, Rainforest Mining, Regulations, Rivers, Saving The Amazon, Social Conflict, Social Justice, Threats To The Amazon, Traditional People center_img Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsoredlast_img read more

Tall and old or dense and young: Which kind of forest is better for the climate?

first_imgArticle published by Morgan Erickson-Davis carbon, Carbon Sequestration, Climate Change, Environment, Forest Destruction, Forests, Global Warming, Global Warming Mitigation, Green, Logging, Rainforest Destruction, Rainforests, Research, Temperate Forests, Tropical Forests Paul Koberstein and Jessica Applegate are editors of Cascadia Times, an environmental journal based in Portland, Oregon. Scientists say reforestation and better forest management can provide 18 percent of climate change mitigation through 2030. But studies appear to be divided about whether it’s better to prioritize the conservation of old forests or the replanting of young ones.A closer look, however, reconciles these two viewpoints. While young forests tend to absorb more carbon overall because trees can be crowded together when they’re small, a tree’s carbon absorption rate accelerates as it ages. This means that forests comprised of tall, old trees – like the temperate rainforests of North America’s Pacific coast – are some of the planet’s biggest carbon storehouses.But when forests are logged, their immense stores of carbon are quickly released. A study found the logging of forests in the U.S. state of Oregon emitted 33 million tons of CO2 – almost as much as the world’s dirtiest coal plant.Researchers are calling on industry to help buffer climate change by doubling tree harvest rotations to 80 years, and urge government agencies managing forests to impose their own harvest restrictions. In 2007, Richard Branson, the British business magnate, offered a $25 million prize to anyone who can invent a device capable of removing significant volumes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.Andy Kerr, a noted Oregon environmentalist, drew a picture of a tree and sent it in. After all, a tree performs the job of sucking carbon out of the air far better than any technology yet devised by humans. But Kerr didn’t win, foiled by contest rules specifying the winner must be the inventor of such a device, and it’s certain neither Kerr nor anyone else invented the tree. An artificial tree might win if it could perform the implausible feat of inhaling CO2.Kerr’s idea, however, was rooted more in the climate benefits provided by an entire forest rather than just a single tree. These benefits can be enormous, according to “Natural Climate Solutions,” a paper published in 2017 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.The paper asserts better management of forests, wetlands and farmland can provide 37 percent of the cost-effective climate mitigation needed through 2030. Forests alone can provide 18 percent of the mitigation, according to a statement published last year by the Climate and Land Alliance and signed by an international group of 40 scientists.“The ‘natural technology’ of forests is currently the only proven means of removing and storing atmospheric CO2 at a scale that can meaningfully contribute to achieving carbon balance,” the 40 scientists said. “The world’s forests contain more carbon than exploitable oil, gas, and coal deposits, hence avoiding forest carbon emissions is just as urgent as halting fossil fuel use.”The Amazon Rainforest is one of the world’s most important carbon sinks.Last year, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warned we have only until 2030 to act if we hope to limit global warming to moderate levels.Forests cool the atmosphere by inhaling CO2 through the process of photosynthesis and storing or sequestering it in roots, trunks, branches, needles and leaves. Half a tree’s weight is carbon. Although every backyard vegetable garden absorbs some amount of carbon, a rainforest takes in exponentially more. For this reason, rainforests and other large terrestrial ecosystems made up of dense vegetation are known as “carbon sinks.”Kerr lives at the edge of a temperate rainforest straddling the west coast of North America from the redwoods of Northern California into Alaska, the largest contiguous temperate rainforest in the world. Few ecosystems anywhere match its capacity to absorb and store carbon. Trees in the temperate rainforest, among the tallest in the world, live for 800 years or more.The expansive Amazon tropical rainforest of South America is one of the world’s largest carbon sinks. But on a per-acre basis, the Amazon is not nearly as efficient at absorbing carbon as the coastal temperate rainforest. The Douglas fir forests of Oregon and the hemlock and cedar forests of Alaska store about twice as much carbon per acre as the Amazon. The giant redwoods of Northern California, which store seven times as much, are regarded as the most carbon dense forests in the world.The temperate rainforest is a “carbon storage powerhouse,” says John Talberth of the Portland, Ore.-based advocacy group Center for a Sustainable Economy (CSE). “If allowed to mature, Pacific Northwest forests can capture and store more carbon than almost any terrestrial ecosystem on Earth.”Pound-for-pound, North America’s temperate rainforests – like this one on the Olympic Peninsula of Washington – beat tropical rainforests when it comes to carbon storage.The problem is most mature trees in the rainforest have been cut down and young ones are not allowed to mature. Outside conservation areas like national parks and wilderness, ancient groves are converted to industrial tree farms by the timber industry.After cutting down every old growth tree it can get its hands on, the industry typically plants a young sapling in its place. The saplings grow for about 40 years on average until the next harvest. Then the cycle repeats again and again.This business model might be good for timber industry profits, but what does it do to the climate?Sara Duncan, a spokeswoman for the Oregon Forest Industry Council, a lobbying group, claims this business model is good for both profits and the climate. She says old growth trees store a lot of carbon, but like everything else, old growth trees eventually die. If they aren’t harvested and converted into wood products, they will fall down in a windstorm, burn up in a wildfire or meet their fate some other way. Eventually they will release all their stored carbon content back to the atmosphere.The industry’s solution to the climate crisis is to log the trees, truck them to the mill, and store the carbon in 2-by-4s, plywood boards and toilet paper. Eventually, however, the carbon in these products will still return to the atmosphere one day.But is there a more climate-friendly way to manage our forests? Can we get more climate mitigation from a forest if we don’t cut it down every 40 years? The science suggests we can.In 2014, a study published in Nature by a team an international team of researchers led Nathan Stephenson, a forest ecologist with the United States Geographical Survey, found that a typical tree’s growth continues to accelerate throughout its lifetime, which in the coastal temperate rainforest can be 800 years of more.Stephenson and his team compiled growth measurements of 673,046 trees belonging to 403 tree species from tropical, subtropical and temperate regions across six continents. They found that the growth rate for most species “increased continuously” as they aged.“This finding contradicts the usual assumption that tree growth eventually declines as trees get older and bigger,” Stephenson says. “It also means that big, old trees are better at absorbing carbon from the atmosphere than has been commonly assumed.”This giant cedar sucked in a lot of carbon during its 1,000-year life. Photo by Morgan Erickson-Davis.But the science, as usual, is muddy. As Mongabay reported in February, a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2019 by Thomas Pugh of the Birmingham Institute of Forest Research in the UK found young forests sequester more carbon per year than old-growth forests.“These findings upend conventional wisdom that old-growth tropical rainforests are the planet’s biggest carbon sinks,” Pugh’s study said. It defined old-growth forests as any stand over 140 years of age.It would appear the two studies contradict each other. But both scientists say they are consistent.“The difference is that Stephenson et al. looked at biomass of individual trees, whereas our study looks at biomass of whole stands of trees,” Pugh said in an email. “Whilst a single tree might continue to pile on more and more biomass, there will be less of such trees in a stand, simply because of their size and as tree stands age, gaps tend to appear due to tree mortality.”“So, our conclusion is actually that young forests are responsible for more of the terrestrial carbon sink than old growth forests,” Pugh said.“Both things are true,” Stephenson said in an email. “Individual tree mass growth rate increases with tree size, but old forests usually absorb carbon more slowly than young forests.”However, the relative growth rates of young and old trees do not tell the entire story.“Older forests store a lot more carbon than young forests and much of it is returned to the atmosphere quickly when harvested and planted with young trees,” says Beverly Law, a professor of global change biology at Oregon State University.By the time it becomes a desk, table or 2-by-4, a log will lose about 70 percent of its carbon, according to Dominick DellaSala, director of the GEOS Institute, an environmental think tank based in Oregon.About 45 percent of the carbon is left on the forest floor, said DellaSala, a member of the Oregon Global Warming Commission Task Force on Forest Carbon. “This includes decomposition of root wads, branches, and tops remaining on site and a little soil carbon. Logging takes nearly half the carbon and puts it into the atmosphere within years.”Trees that fall naturally release their carbon gradually over decades as they decompose.Another 25 percent is lost during manufacturing, he said. And as the finished wood products decay over time, he said, they emit even more.And that doesn’t include carbon emitted by chainsaws, logging trucks and lathes. In 2018, Law led a team of researchers who quantified these and all other carbon emissions as logs move from forest to sawmill. Their paper, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, said logging operations in Oregon contribute an average of 33 million tons of CO2 to the air. This equates to almost as much as the world’s dirtiest coal plant, Taichung Coal Plant in Taiwan, which emits about 36 million tons per year.Moreover, the climate impacts of logging are even greater if you factor in a harvested log’s lost future growth opportunities, Law says. Although her paper makes no attempt to quantify a logged tree’s foregone climate mitigation potential, she acknowledges it could be significant.Law called on the industry to help buffer climate change by doubling harvest rotations to 80 years and urged government agencies managing forests to impose their own harvest restrictions. These and other actions could increase the amount of carbon absorbed by Oregon forests by 56 percent by the year 2100, as well as improve water quality and biodiversity, her paper said. She is conducting a similar analysis for forests in California and Washington.Even after the wood is converted into a wood product, the carbon will likely return to the atmosphere sooner than people might think, Law said.“Old growth trees in the coastal temperate rainforest can sequester carbon for hundreds of years,” she said, “which is much longer than is expected for buildings that are generally assumed to outlive their usefulness or be replaced within several decades.”center_img Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsored Feedback: Use this form to send a message to the editor of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page.last_img read more