A new study has warned that Europe’s forests are showing signs of reaching saturation point in their ability to absorb carbon dioxide.
It means one of the continent’s main defences against global warming is under threat.
A declining volume of trees, deforestation and the impact of natural disturbances are to blame.
Forests currently soak up about 10 percent of Europe’s emissions, but woodlands from Spain to Sweden are getting older and are packed with trees that are less efficient at soaking them up.
Calculations suggest saturation point could be reached by around 2030 unless governments take action.
The information comes in a study published in the journal Nature Climate Change.
“These regrowing forests have shown to be a persistent carbon sink, projected to continue for decades, however, there are early signs of saturation. Forest policies and management strategies need revision if we want to sustain the sink,” the report said.
Wildfires in central Portugal continued to burn out of control on Wednesday. The most serious blaze was near Coimbra where around 500 firefighters were working to put it out.
European forests near carbon saturation point | euronews, Europe
This is really bad. We need to drastically reduce our oil consumption and promote green energy, as well as further promote sylvicultural activities.
You want to reduce oil consumption? Increase the price. If you charge 10 Euros a liter? They'll slow consuming. The economically efficient method would be over CO2 certificates. That reduces heating, warm water and power use. Tell the folks what it means honestly. Put it to the vote.
Good we talked about it.
I'm actually thinking about this. Electric cars.
Kick-starting Europe's electric vehicle industry
So far the only major companies that have working electric cars are in the the USA and Canada. The only thing coming out of European countries in this regard is this
VW unveils electric e-Up (2013) first pictures | Automotive & Motoring News | Car Magazine Online
Let's face it. Most of Europe is all bluster and well trodden paths. There is no real innovation there. The society at least in the European countries I know is geared against change. That is why they do change so horribly poorly, when they talk themselves into a corner and have to. Just look at the way Germany is going about its new energy policy or reforming its military.
I'm actually thinking about this. Electric cars.
Kick-starting Europe's electric vehicle industry
So far the only major companies that have working electric cars are in the the USA and Canada. The only thing coming out of European countries in this regard is this
VW unveils electric e-Up (2013) first pictures | Automotive & Motoring News | Car Magazine Online
European forests near carbon saturation point | euronews, Europe
This is really bad. We need to drastically reduce our oil consumption and promote green energy, as well as further promote sylvicultural activities.
Let's face it. Most of Europe is all bluster and well trodden paths. There is no real innovation there. The society at least in the European countries I know is geared against change. That is why they do change so horribly poorly, when they talk themselves into a corner and have to. Just look at the way Germany is going about its new energy policy or reforming its military.
It also doesn't make much sense. As long as photosynthesis is taking place, carbon is being sequestered. Cellulose, sugar and starch, all consume carbon dioxide in their production . In other words, if the forest is growing, it's consuming CO2. If growth and decay have reached equilibrium, then the obvious solution is massive timber harvest and the planting of new trees.
Prompting "green energy," whatever that is, will be about as effective as the search for a perpetual motion machine, just with less profitable results.
Actually that is not entirely true. The electric car business started early in Europe.. as in the 1980s, but went quickly bust due to low gas prices and anti-electric car marketing from the oil and car industry. I remember a British and Danish company in the 1980s-90s trying to push for an electric car. There was a famous crash of one of the cars at its presentation.
But regardless, European car manufactures along with Japanese lead in innovation when it comes to km per litre, which is why on average an European car goes almost double the km than that of a US car.
As for the OP issue.. it has been an issue for decades .. I remember reading about this in the 1980s. Overall Europe has brought down its production of CO2.. unlike other parts of the world.
One solution btw, is to plant more trees, to spread the burden.. which Europe does constantly.
Smarter people than you and I who study these sort of thing said that they are reaching carbon saturation levels.
Green energy is the way of the future. We need to phase out, slowly but surely, anything that need outrageous amounts of fuel. Cars first.
Maybe it did start in the 1980s, but it didn't impose itself due to the reasons you mentioned and others I'm sure. But today, the electric cars design made by European companies are not much to look at. The US and Canada have a leg up on this one with actual working designs.
Fuel efficiency is a good thing. I'm not doubting that. But we need to phase out combustion cars. I for one would like the next car i own to be an electric one that I'm not afraid to drive in city and outside the city too.
Why don't they plant new trees?
Howso?
Cars need energy to move. How that energy is generated, stored, and applied to moving the car,
is what is important.
Organic hydrocarbons have issues, but mostly that they are finite.
An electric car may not be any cleaner than a fuel car, if the source for the
electricity is a coal plant.
Energy density - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The best battery on the list is at 1.8 MJ/Kg, Gasoline is about 46 MJ/Kg.
So a cars petrol tank holds 40 liters that's 1840 MJ of energy of which
Mr Carnot allows us to extract 460 MJ (Aprox 25%).
So 460 MJ divided by 1.8 MJ/Kg= 255 Kg
A car would need to carry 255 Kg of Batteries to equal 40 Kg of petrol.
LOL then you dont know Europe... no real innovation.. get real. Europe is light years ahead of the US on many points (and on others it is not). If anyone is against change the it is the US.. look at your whole debate about healthcare over to abortion to gay rights.. same old 16th century views.
Funny you would see it that way. Abortion and gay rights are very thin ice for you to want to argue progress on. They are examples in an emotional social experiment, we are conducting. Whether they constitute progress or not we will know in a couple for generations.
LOL then you dont know Europe... no real innovation.. get real. Europe is light years ahead of the US on many points (and on others it is not). If anyone is against change the it is the US.. look at your whole debate about healthcare over to abortion to gay rights.. same old 16th century views.
LOL then you dont know Europe... no real innovation.. get real. Europe is light years ahead of the US on many points (and on others it is not). If anyone is against change the it is the US.. look at your whole debate about healthcare over to abortion to gay rights.. same old 16th century views.
Actually, you're pretty wrong on all counts.
Progress does not have to be technological and even there, there is a lot of innovation in Europe, especially in the wireless internet (non mobile).., solar and wind power.. car motors (your Chevy Volt engine came from Germany), big pharma, and so on and so on. Just dismissing Europe as an innovation black hole is a big mistake...
Electric cars produce more CO2 than economical cars with combustion engines.I'm actually thinking about this. Electric cars.
You are right. Absolutely. Progress usually requires new or at least adapted behavior. This is why the Germans go for marginal adaptation and its innovation. They make exceedingly appetizing cars for instance, because they have adapted them step by tiny step to please. No question you live well doing that. (Actually there is an economic question mark behind that last statement). But there are no major developments. This is what you see in Germany and, as far as I can see, in a number of other continental countries. Those, however, I cannot judge as well.
The examples you chose actually underline my opinion. Just think of it. Large segments of the German population live by producing machines that exhaust huge quantities of the CO2 humanity throws out into the atmosphere. Now don't tell me that someone else would produce them, if Germans did not. The fact is they do and have not replaced their atmosphere killing (if you believe in these things) behavior. As it is a major issue in Germany and German politicians and media regularly take other countries to task for CO2 polluting, it seems rather quaint to mention car as an area Germany does well (good?).
Electric cars produce more CO2 than economical cars with combustion engines.
Electricity must be produced with coal.
The Batteries cost much energy by producing them.
What is better: To drive a car with solar electricity and to need coal-made-electricity for washing-machines or to drive a car with coal-made-electricity an use solar electricity for the washing-maschine?Yes, but considering most of the electrical power tanking station here in Spain are driven by solar.. then no. It all depends on how you design the system.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?