From the start, let me explain that I am not a scientist and
I know nothing about global warming. However, I am concerned we may be spending
money in the wrong places and these funds could be better used elsewhere.
It cannot be disputed that wherever man settles there must be
a micro climate change by the simple fact that, once he had progressed beyond
the hunter/gatherer stage in order to grow food crops, he had to destroy the
forest tree climax. As the population grew, he progressively killed off more and
more forest cover. This was no problem for Gaia provided the availability of
forested land was not a limiting factor. This was the case up until
comparatively recent times but there are indications that the present level of
world population is now too great for the natural resources of this planet.
Most of the world’s agro-socio-economic woes can be laid at
the doors of ‘world over-population’. Strangely, most of the developed world’s
leaders, both scientific and political, have ignored this issue and diverted
themselves into considering what are simply symptoms. In particular, the main
distractions are Global Warming or Climate Change. Undoubtedly, this is a major
issue for the world’s ecological stability but there seems to be little
understanding that this is a symptom and not the cause, which is leading
politicians into massive expenditures on attempting to control carbon dioxide
emissions.
This expenditure may well end up being a complete waste of
funds when money and time could be used better elsewhere. To pinpoint carbon
dioxide emissions as the sole cause of all the world’s environmental woes is
also a waste of time. It is not only carbon dioxide that is the problem. Indeed,
high levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are actually beneficial for
plant growth and it should be remembered that carbon dioxide is only 340 parts
per million in the atmosphere whilst nitrogen is more like 700,000.
More than a few people are now coming round to the thought
that a lot of the global warming is due to the removal of the rainforest cover.
Politicians and even some scientists do not seem to appreciate the critical role
of trees in the world’s ecology. Some do not even understand why it is cool if
one walks in a forest and hot if one comes out into the sunlight. They think
that the forest is cool because it provides shade and some reduction in
temperature. This is true in the same way that a corrugated iron roof will give
shade and reduce the temperature. However, the tree is an entirely different
matter. The tree during daylight carries our photosynthesis on a grand scale,
converting carbon dioxide and water in the presence of chlorophyll to
carbohydrates (timber), using vast amounts of incoming solar energy. This is
what takes the heat out of the surrounding atmosphere and is, in reality, the
tree’s immediate micro climate. It also uses up tremendous energy in
transporting water from the soil and evaporating it into the atmosphere.
Let me re-state that I am not of a scientific bent and nobody
with a modicum of scientific knowledge will deny that mankind is the cause of
climate change - every time a family cuts down trees to grow annual crops they
inevitably change the micro climate. The natural ecology of the Earth is a tree
climax which creates a sustainable macro climate. If the tree cover is removed,
as is happening all over the planet, then the ecological stability is
endangered. The cause of this instability, and rising temperature, is entirely
due to population pressure on a finite resource - that is cultivable land. The
real problem is entirely due to the amount of people in the world and not carbon
dioxide emissions - air pollutants are obviously creators of social problems,
such as pea-soup fogs, smoke, nuclear waste, etc., but these are normally micro
climate changes and not macro ones.
It is critical in the management of the world’s ecology that
the relationship between man and plants is understood. The most important
element in the world is carbon - for both plants and mankind. Life is not based
on silica or nitrogen or any other element - though they are all involved in
organic chemistry. The world is actually a carbon based environment.
Another simple fact is that mankind and animals cannot live
or survive without plants but plants can survive quite happily without animals.
The next important fact which must be understood is that mankind needs oxygen
and plants (including trees) need carbon dioxide. To put it another way, man
cannot survive without oxygen and plants will die without carbon dioxide. I
apologise for the repetition but it seems to me that these simple facts of the
world’s nature are not completely understood or appreciated.
However, it is the tree that is the most important factor in
all this. Thousands of years ago, the ecology of the earth was predominantly a
tree climax, with upper storey and lower storey environments. With the
unstoppable increase in the population of man the tree has been removed simply
because it does not allow man to cultivate the soil and grow food crops.
Despite this, the tree, and other green plants, remains an
important part of the world’s natural cover and without its natural biology man
would find it next to impossible to survive on this planet.
To be continued…
The above data and research was compiled from sources
believed to be reliable. However, neither MBMG International Ltd nor its
officers can accept any liability for any errors or omissions in the above
article nor bear any responsibility for any losses achieved as a result of any
actions taken or not taken as a consequence of reading the above article. For
more information please contact Graham Macdonald on [email protected]
|