this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2023
23 points (100.0% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5244 readers
449 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't see how this is related to the content of the article.
"Can We Save the Redwoods by Helping Them Move?"
Yes, we can. While it's easy enough to plant trees, their survival requires a certain amount of work and ecological transformation. Whether moving them ahead of trends already happening in local climates and anticipating where they will be able to exist later, or helping preserve their current ranges, extremely long lived species in particular need stability. That stability isn't going to be found in climates that continue to be affected by human's interaction with the environment.
For how long? For long enough that the mother trees they discuss in the article can become established over hundreds to thousands of years. Absolutely not.
The problem is people.
Could we? Yes. Will we? No.
Humans have always and will always care about their meager lifespans in preference of the longer lifespans of things like trees and species and ecologies. Where they have ability, they lack perspective.
'We can just move them,' they'll say, over and over and over.