alphacyberranger@lemmy.world to Uplifting News@lemmy.worldEnglish · 5 months agoLula da Silva keeps his promise: Amazon deforestation reduced by 64%thebetter.newsexternal-linkmessage-square19fedilinkarrow-up1338arrow-down16
arrow-up1332arrow-down1external-linkLula da Silva keeps his promise: Amazon deforestation reduced by 64%thebetter.newsalphacyberranger@lemmy.world to Uplifting News@lemmy.worldEnglish · 5 months agomessage-square19fedilink
minus-squaregrue@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up27·5 months agoIn order for the forest to no longer shrink, the decrease in deforestation would have to be at least 100%.
minus-squareemmanuel_car@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up3·4 months agoOr the rate of reforestation must be greater than the rate of deforestation.
minus-squaregrue@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·4 months agoI assumed the deforestation was a net measurement to begin with. Good point though, maybe I shouldn’t have.
minus-squareflambonkscious@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·4 months agoThat ignores the complexity of forests, however (and not just your comment). Young forests aren’t nearly as diverse, it takes a long time for the complexity to come back. Otherwise we would just plant shitty pine trees everywhere (a terrible idea!)
In order for the forest to no longer shrink, the decrease in deforestation would have to be at least 100%.
Or the rate of reforestation must be greater than the rate of deforestation.
I assumed the deforestation was a net measurement to begin with. Good point though, maybe I shouldn’t have.
That ignores the complexity of forests, however (and not just your comment).
Young forests aren’t nearly as diverse, it takes a long time for the complexity to come back. Otherwise we would just plant shitty pine trees everywhere (a terrible idea!)