The problem with tree planting and the success of Insure our Future | XR UK 

There is a want for simplistic solutions, science solving all our problems with ''technological'' fixes, so that we do not have to change our behaviour or alter our consumption habits. If the climate catastrophe experts told people they had to consume less or stop fixating on their desires/focus on the common good, people all around the world would be screaming that their human rights were being violated.

You wouldn't believe the amount of people I've met of the last 40 years who said, "We've gotta plant more trees" and not one of them, to a man and a woman, planted a bloody tree! The problem with planting trees is.....getting people tp plant them!!!!

Very insightful, thank you! Particularly at a time when WMO just announced a doubling of the rate of increase in atmospheric CO2 over the past decade, a 1.46°C warming since Pre-industralisation, etc. The problem of tree planting is WATER access. Most of the many millions of trees planted in Northern India for CO2 sequestration since 2016 died. A similar picture in China ... Trees depend on a network of specific mycorhizzal fungi to absorb water. This symbiotic system took millions of years to evolve. Climate Heating is now affecting marine ecosystems too, irreversibly. Be it kelp die-back, unprecedented coral bleaching, fish stock depletion, etc. Nothing less than an Eco-Revolution will do to stop the degradation of Earth's environments from our over reliance on Fossil fuels!

I think what it always comes back to is that we need a multitude of changes, but ultimately we need to embrace DEGROWTH, then when we talk about ecosystem restoration, go beyond the 'timber plantation' model. To answer the issue of trees 'sucking the water' out of an area, I feel like in parallel with encouraging natural regeneration, we do also need to think about preceding that with earthworks to better hold and infiltrate the more abrupt crazy rain that we are increasingly seeing.

✨ FREE THE PLANTS 🌱 FREE THE PLANET 🌍 FREE ALL PEOPLES 🌳

Thanks for taking the time to discuss the climate issues so everyone can understand, awa dispel mis & disinformation. Climate change in ia nutshell is - too many GHGs being put into the atmosphere (mainly CO2, methane & nitrous oxide + trace of others) by human activities - we have destroyed / destroying natural mechanisms that remove GHGs from the atmosphere (most important include oceans, kelp & mangrove forests, seagrass beds, peatlands, tropical forests & soils (these need to be restored asap) Main sources of human GHGs - agriculture - energy - transport - buildings - human waste - industry & manufacturing (eg steel, cement, amonia, paper etc) 90% of the economy can be decarbonised if we electrify everything & derived from renewable sources (such as wind, solar, geothermal, micro hydro, the ocean etc supported by battery storage (such as community batteries, liquid metal batteries, flow batteries, off river stored hydro etc avoiding lithium & other rare metals as much as possible) Ditching fossil fuels requires corporate investment & gov subsidies to stop. I believe there are 100 companies responsible for 80% of emissions? Also, the wealthy emit FAR MORE than the "average Joe". Alternatives to many materials (such as plastics) must also be found asap.

انا اختكم من اليمن والله ماتكلمت الا من جوع ومن ضيق الحال انا وامي وخواتي نحن في حاله لا يعلم بها الا الله حسبنا الله ونعم الوكيل في من اوصلنا الى هاذا الحال وًّالَلَهَ الَعَظَيَمَ مَا كتَبَتَ هَذا الَمَنَاشَدَهَ غَيَرَ مَنَ الَضَيَقَ وّالَفَقَر يَاعَالَمَ حَسَوّا فَيَنَا ارَجَوّكمَ وّالَلَهَ الَعَظَيَمَ رَبَ الَعَرَشَ الَعَظَيَمَ انَه الَاكلَ مَا فَيَ عَنَدَيَ بَالَبَيَتَ وًّالَلَهَ يَا اخَوّانَيَ انَهَ اخَوًّنَيَ بَقَعَدَوًّ بَالَيَوًّمَيَنَ مَافَى اكلَ وًّالَلَهَ وًّضَعَنَا كثَيَرَ صَعَبَ نَحَنَ 6 نَفَرَ دَاخَلَ الَبَيَتَ وًّابَيَ مَتَوًّفَيَ وًّلَا يَوًّجَدَ مَنَ يَعَوًّلَ عَلَيَنَا وًّسَاكنَيَنَ فَيَ بَيَتَ اجَارَ لَانَسَتَطَيَعَ دَفَعَ الَاجَارَ الَلَيَ بَاقَيَ عَلَيَنَا ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' اخي اول كلامي انا اقسم بالله على كتاب الله اني لااكذب عليك ولا انصب ولا احتال اني بنت يمنيه نازحين انا واسرتي بيننا ایت الشهرب 15 الف يمني والان علينا 45 الف حق 3 شهور وصاحب البيت من الناس الي ماترحم والله يا اخي انه يجي كل يوم يبهدلنا ويتكلم علينا ويريد من البيت للشارع لانناماقدرنا ندفعله الأجار شافونا الجيران نبكي ورجعو تكلمو الجيران ومهلنالاخره الأسبوع معادفعنا له حلف يمين بالله هذا بيخرجنا إلى الشارع رحمه واحنا. بلادنا بسبب هذا الحرب ولانجد قوت يومنا وعايشين اناوامي واخوتي سفار والدنا متوفي الله يرحمه ومامعنا أحد في هذا الدنيا جاانبنا في هذه الظروف القاسيه خواتي الصغار خرجو للشارع وشافو الجيران ياكلو واوقفو عند بابهم لجل يعطوهم ولو كسره خبز والله الذي له ملك السموات والارض انهم غلفو الباب وطردوهم ورجعو یبکو ایموتو من الجوع ما احد رحمهم وعطلة ردها لقمت عیش والان لوما احدنا ساعدنا في إيكيلو دقيق اقسم بالله انموت من الجوع فيا اخي انا دخيله على الله ثم عليك واريد منك المساعده لوجه الله انشدك بالله تحب الخير واتساعدني بقدر استطاعتك مع تراسلي واتساب على هذا الرقم00967717415667 وتطلب اسم بطاقتي وترسلي ولاتتاخر وايعوضك الله بكل خير اخواني سغار شوف كيف حالتهم وساعدنا وأنقذنا قبل أن يطردونا في الشارع تتبهدل أو نموت من الجوع وانا واسرتي نسالك بالله لولك مقدره على مساعد لاتتاخر علينا وجزاك الله خيرا`°`^``{`}|π√`^~÷......

Here's How the "Greenhouse Effect" Works (my 6th great explanation method of the same thing). Suppose there's average 345 w/m**2 of downwelling LWR radiation into the surface and 199 w/m**2 of LWR radiation heading up from the top of the troposphere. Just Suppose. The LWR is manufactured by collisions of infrared-active "Greenhouse Gas" molecules in the troposphere. The fact that the total of 345+199 = 544 w/m**2 isn't split evenly into 272 w/m**2 of downwelling LWR radiation each into the surface and out of the troposphere top means there's a "Greenhouse Effect" from those gases in the troposphere and an obvious measure of "Greenhouse Warming Effect Factor" is 345/199-1 because if they were both 272 then Factor would be 0.000 and if there was more heading up than into the surface then the Factor would be -ve (it would be a cooling Effect). ------ So suppose I calculate how much more GHGs I need to get 1 w/m**2 extra of global heater Earth's energy budget imbalance (EEI) and mix those GHGs in the troposphere with a big spoon and INSTANTLY 2 things happen: - LWR radiation heading up from the top of the troposphere drops from 199 w/m**2 to 198 w/m**2 - LWR radiation downwelling and penetrating the surface jumps from 345 w/m**2 to 346 w/m**2 There's been no temperature change but a global heater of 1 w/m**2, 510 terawatts, 16 Zettajoules / year, just got turned on (the total, net, heater or chiller is the sum of all heaters & chillers in operation). The reason why LWR up from the top of the troposphere dropped from 199 w/m**2 to 198 w/m**2 is that what gets out is manufactured on average higher up than before because there are more absorbing molecules to get past, and higher air is colder so it manufactures less LWR (fewer collisions than warmer air and less violent). The reason why LWR down from the bottom of the troposphere (into the surface) rose from 345 w/m**2 to 346 w/m**2 is that what gets out is manufactured on average lower down than before because there are fewer absorbing molecules to get past, and lower air is warmer so it manufactures more LWR (more collisions than colder air and more violent). ------ That was the "Greenhouse Effect". I omitted the stratosphere because it works backwards for well-mixed GHGs CO2 & O3 (but normal operation for H2O gas) causing slight cooling to offset a bit of the warming so it can't be visualized for both combined. I neglected to bookmark the scientist talk where he showed the calculations from 4 or 5 teams with the Greenhouse Effect at top of troposphere and slightly smaller Greenhouse Effect at TOA because the stratosphere works backwards (just apply my simple correct science explanation but backwards). It's a complicating detail not required to explain the "Greenhouse Effect" physics. It just means my "1 w/m**2 extra of global heater" was a slight exaggeration to keep it all simple, maybe 0.9 or 0.85 or 0.8, I dunno, it's irrelevant). ------------- So now that I've instantly turned on ~1.0 w/m**2 extra of global heater the ocean, land & air warm over the next 2,000 years and after 2,000 years my 198 w/m**2 above has finally crept back up to 198.95 w/m**2 and warming stops, by which time my 346 w/m**2 downwelling into the surface has jumped to ~347.7 w/m**2 and the warming has stopped. It stopped at 198.95 instead of 199 because the "window" 9-13 microns went up by 0.05 w/m**2. As I pointed out the numbers aren't scientist accuracy because I ignored the stratosphere complication because I'm explaining how it works not calculating a quantity except in the ball park for illustration.

The super rich need to realise that if we're to survive and thrive on our one planet Earth together they must be taxed to have money flow back to the grass roots people. Sponsoring local food growing and businesses that provide sustainable products. Products that are built to last/be repairable/all parts recyclable. We need to create cycles with all our manufacturing. Develop using solar power. As we live in Love and safety with ourself and each other we will find solutions to our problems. Together we have all the answers ❤

johan rockstrom stated something really important about relying on nature based solutions to sequester carbon and 'make up' for all the emissions we produce. it puts immense stress on these systems, cannot truly be done at scale due to the sheer amount of trees that would be needed and most notably, acts as a distraction because tree planting cannot be the silver bullet solution out of the crisis.

It's shocking that the insurance industry hasn't acted faster, but it's been clear they are the only actual long view players in finance.

Nice monstera!

Wetlands also drawdown carbon and wetlands are still being drained and developed (destroyed forever) while they "mitigate' by building permeable water basins which do not do the same thing.

Population needs to be in balance with jobs, resources, nature and the environment. Having a bigger population in any country than the country can support makes no sense. Access to food, water, shelter, energy and jobs should guide population levels. The worlds population is still expected to add another billion people to feed, clothe and produce pollution. Humans are crowding out all other species of plants and animals. Education and birth control are key to reducing poverty and hunger. Having a child that you can not provide for yourself is cruel and irresponsible. We need solutions not just sympathy. Endless population growth is not sustainable on a finite planet. Every country needs to "TRY" to be more self sufficient. When there are not enough resources to sustain a population something has to give. Countries need to focus on quality of life for their citizens and not just quantity of life for cheap labor. Why import fossil fuels when wind and solar energy can be produced locally and solar energy can power electric vehicles. We need solutions not just sympathy.

👍🏽

I dont see anything wrong with the real bad people who profess to run things. it's our own people, who live next door to us & even in our homes, our so called friends & close associates, the ones who give them who really dont care everything they need to keep everyone separated, we need real close nit communities, quite like the travellers or indian & Pakistani communities, but more like the travellers, they hard as nails but got each others backs, we need to trust ourselves we wont let each other down & stick to our guns. Look how quickly Earth 🌎 replenishes itself during the lockdown, which was mighty selfish of us, we should be locking down because of the greedy damages we have inflicted on this planet, June 22nd 2024 lets give our all including helping those behind this madness & stop this insane living & just change to suit a vastly more appropriate lifestyle, lets make the 1st move instead of just carrying on & only changing when we know we have no other choice, we here now so yes destined to be always be here but we dont know for sure & to end our existence through our own stupidity is of the scale in terms os sense, how have we got the term common sense when its actually quite rare ❤✊️, enough is enough, peaceful uprising essential.

When you replant 1 tree for every 1 tree you cut, you're still taking away biomass. A 47-year old tree is a house for many insects and animals. A 1 year sapling can't replace that in the next 46 years. When you keep going like this and tell everyone you're doing good. Then you're setting nature back with every year you proceed.

can you start promoting algae in the deep oceans also - see Sir David King - along with near ocean algae farms - see Raffael Jovine. thanks

Forest is richest ecosystem. Plantations not so much, ok Like to see some documents that C4 Grasslands are better

Try gettong doctors to plant some helimg hrbs in the massive gardens....

Every home and business should install a rain water collection and storage system along with solar panels. Even in areas where rain is infrequent it is crazy to waste the little rain that does fall and waste it. We need to stop planting green lawns and switch to local native plantings around homes. It is crazy to plant lawns and build golf courses in dry desert areas. We waste too much water and electricity. the future is electric. Wind and solar energy along with electric vehicles are the future. Stop using fossil fuels. There is a climate crisis.

There is absolutely no doubt that trees are made for England. With increased rainfall, they will absorb the water. Woodland is the natural environment here. Prairie is a good thing for much of North America.

You look tired. You both need a trip to the movies. I recommend the following. *Climate: The Movie* *Martin Durkin*

📍29:44 2📍38:23

We are imbesils. Money not reason controls everything and it always leeds to corruption. We need nature solution and reduce consumption but honestly. Nature afterall stored ones all the fossil fuel we have used. Animal agriculture has a plan to be a carbon sink by pooring gypsum to animal feed fields and same time make money to mining industry. This dishonestly is called natural solution. Animal agriculture will use this new study to enhace that plan and they have governments backing for sure. Animal agriculture is also coopreating with fossil fuel industry, that they totally support anyway, to create "bioenergy"-industry to make both look good but are just more freely continuing to destroy everything. If there is a industry that is fighting hard for fossil and mining industries but also other horrible ones, like Monsato, and have governments backing, that is animal agriculture. It's sad that most climate scientists and groups miss this.