This conversation is closed.

To plant trees in key locations to act as viable source of nutrients and acting to stop the effects of sea rise.

I understand temperatures have been rising and we have linked this to us producing more greenhouse gasses. But also we have been in the process of major deforestation for the last century as well.1) Trees hold the earth together, meaning that sediment does not flow into rivers as much, this excess sediment has been linked to flooding areas in major rivers. 2) Trees offer cover to the ground, causing less of the ground to be heated, meaning that the earth does not get so warm, causing less convectional rainfall and less extreme weather systems. 3) trees store water, with the amount of trees we have chopped down this could be linked to the more water in the oceans, we have lost a major water store. Also trees act as interception devices meaning less water gets into the river as quickly, causing less flooding. 4) Of course, the main reason think trees are cool is that they are carbon sinks, the reason we are getting more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere is because they are not getting stored? 5) we are killing of many animals by taking away their habitat, these too take in nutrients and energy, so this excess energy is going into making the world even more unbalanced ecosystem. these are just a few examples of why trees are good.
But i am thinking, if we planted trees in strategic locations then we would not need to rely on energy for cooling, or worry about flooding and excess carbon dioxide amounts. After all, these are natural and adding to the natural world, as the new proposed carbon sink in the EU is a concrete mass, which will probably take a few years to take in the carbon it put out in the manufacturing process

  • thumb
    May 6 2014: Personally i believe our future is not on the ground, once we are off the ground our foot print will be minimal and we can let nature retake most of the surface. Once we crack the puzzle of the variable temp superconducting material then it will be just a matter of time before we climb into the sky as did the first fish climbed onto land long ago.
  • thumb
    May 26 2014: Great idea, Toby!

    Imagine if every community in every country encourages and supports every adult to plant trees, especially fruit bearing trees that can add to our existing food sources, aside from the multitude of benefits that you have mentioned on your post.
  • thumb
    May 20 2014: not a bad idea but there could be so much more. at least that's what I want.
  • Comment deleted

    • May 12 2014: I have never heard this either, sounds completely feasible as many animals have amazing ways to communicate with each other. True teachers generally only know the syllabus, and tree talking is not on it so why would they know it ? :L It takes a great teacher to go out of their way to find quirky little facts like this, and they are the ones that succeed as they make kids interested. Natures role in the view of humans is completely wrong, we depend on nature, and therefore nature should be treated better than us.
  • May 4 2014: Well Toby you actually have a very good point there as trees are houses and if we don't chop them down for ourselves they provide shelter and nutrients for thousands of others both above the ground and below. Some trees grow as deep as they are tall and that does provide shelter, water and food for many animals, insects and other necessary organisms. As you say it also provides structure to hold the soil and make use of the water and nutrients while filtering out carbon and producing pure clean oxygen. If there where not trees we would all surely be dead.
    • May 12 2014: Exactly my point, which when pretty much every government in the world has access to this information, why do they chop thousands of them down, it baffles me. :L
      • May 12 2014: The human race should not be know for it's intelligence. Even the dumbest of animals behave much smarter in regards to preserving the species.
  • thumb
    May 2 2014: There is no need to use scare tactics about questionable man-made-global-warming, there is no one fighting for more deserts and less trees.
    TEDsters are generally fully aware of the importance trees and all plant and wild animal life; we don’t need to be sold on going green. TEDsters are the innovators, investors, and advocates for being green.

    People already love nature, and want to live in green buildings, and if it also will be good for the climate then just let that just be icing on the cake.
    Climate does not and should not be the main and only selling point, when there are so many other good reasons that directly affect people’s lives.

    who would not enjoy living like this,

    And by the way this is all that is needed.
    Holistic management, employs people, is self-funding, and makes places more livable. And if it also helps the climate, that is nice also.
    • May 2 2014: I wasn't trying to scare anyone, I am still at school and was just curious on others views, i just find it amazing how arrogant many people are to the real life situation they are oblivious to yet waste their lives living in TV worlds. But still, i do feel that the need for going 'green' is not the only option, i feel that if we just limited what we did there would not be excess gasses so green buildings would not be necessary. The problem is the natural balance has been completely disrupted by boosting emissions and cutting stores.
      I follow TED talks, watching many in my free time, and have been reading article for a long time, so i know what a forward thinking bunch you all are, i too am hoping to become of this nature- hopefully a career in engineering will let me do what i want! :)
      • thumb
        May 6 2014: I trust scaring was not your intent, sadly many use similar wording to generate fear and profit for themselves. Sorry if I come off defensively, the point I was trying to get across was to use a different approach. Instead of “man-made global warming” how about encouraging “man-helped nature”, focus on what the general public can understand related to and feel good about.

        For example; St. Louis just was ranked as the 13th worst air quality city in the US, knowing that to me could be a good angle to get people and the government in St. Louis to plant more greenery and trees. And in some areas fruit and nut trees would add an additional incentive.

        I think if each of us looks around our home towns we can find quality of life improvements that could be made, that also are green.
        Is there a poor area that could use some window caulking or installation that would reduce heating and cooling cost, and the fact it would also reduce heat-island effect and help the environment can be just for those who care about such thinks.
        • May 12 2014: I know what you mean, there are certain groups that can be too far one way and blow every other feasible option out of proportion to make their idea look better. Man helped nature would basically be us going back into kind of tribal setting were working with nature to get our resources i guess you mean. obviously with the advantages of technology, no man would live a life without the internet now he has become accustomed to it :D
          Everywhere could do with some advances, i am glad Apple has taken the initiative in trying to get their carbon footprint way below all their competitors, the length they have gone to is quite impressive to be honest.
          I also am curious of the fact that something stupid- like 80% of journeys made in a car are less than 5 miles. Thats when the car is at its least efficient and putting out the most fumes, more sensible to bike?
  • May 2 2014: I will go for re-forestation with bio engineered fast going trees. Only way human created temperature rise can be prevented is by reducing population to two billion or less. Per person production of green house will increase. West will not decrease their standard of living and others will not stop until their standard of living is same as west.