Trees Won't Fix Global Warming, Study Says

According to the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, new research has shown that the theory of growing more trees to help kill off global warming will actually have little effect on the growing problem.

Everyone has heard about Global Warming. It has become a hot topic lately as studies have shown that there is indeed a problem and it is only going to get worse unless someone steps up and takes steps to at least slow it down. And who would that be? The President. Which is why it is such a hot topic in the news now as we reach an upcoming presidential election in 2008 in the United States.

So, a recent theory to combat this global warming was to plant more trees, which would be a way to ultimately store the carbon dioxide that is emitted into the Earth's atmosphere. Everyone knows, No trees = No Carbon Dioxide = No Oxygen = No Life. Pretty scary, one little piece of the environment would take away life completely. This sounds like a good idea to plant more trees, but apparently a new research study proves this to have a little effect at all.

How was this study done? It was conducted by Duke University by scientists in wooded areas of North Carolina. Scientists took care of pine trees every day for ten years in this area, bathing the pine trees in extra carbon dioxide. After the study was complete, they concluded that only the trees that they had nourished with the most water and nutrients had actually stored enough carbon dioxide that would have any effect on global warming. What happened to the trees that they did not care for the most? All that happened to there pine trees is they grew more tissue, which is not enough.

So, don't the results sound good? Sure, the results show global warming good be effected in a positive way by nourishing trees, but how would this ever possibly to an extent that would make a difference. With weather scenarios of droughts, floods, hurricanes, mud slides, and everything else, in our world, this would not be possible.

"In some areas, the growth is maybe five to 10 percent more, and in other areas it's 40 percent more," said FACE project director Ram Oren of Duke University. "So in sites that are poor in nutrients and water we see very little response. In sites that are rich in both, we see a large response."

"If water availability decreases at the same time that carbon dioxide increases, then we might not have a net gain in carbon sequestration," Oren said.

So it seems scientists are back to the drawing tables on trying to slow down and fix the threat of global warming.

SOURCE

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory