China's efforts to slow land degradation and climate change by planting trees and restoring grasslands have shifted water around the country in huge, unforeseen ways, new research shows.
China's efforts to slow land degradation and climate change by planting trees and restoring grasslands have shifted water around the country in huge, unforeseen ways, new research shows.
14 Comments
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 60 pts · 262d
Wow
Hux@lemmy.ml · 31 pts · 261d
It is very interesting, but I wish the article was a bit longer and was more specific about the comparative impacts of the water distribution effects it referred to.
The article basically says “stuff changed, here are a couple of numbers”, but it didn’t elaborate on the actual changes and effects and how they compare to 20 or 50 years ago from either an ecological vantage point or human experience point of view.
LibertyLizard@quokk.au · 2 pts · 187d
Yeah. This is super interesting but this was always a concern I had of this project, which has the potential to be great but is also so large it almost borders on geoengineering. Changes in water distribution could be good but I'd say they're a bit more likely to cause harm than help.
HubertManne@piefed.social · 21 pts · 261d
wow. this is a tough one to comment on as its not really a good/bad but more its complicated thing.
stenAanden@feddit.dk · 3 pts · 261d
how is it not univocally a good thing?
mikezane@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 261d
The areas of China with higher percentages of population is overall getting less water than before as there is more evaporation and China will need to account for this in their water distribution plans.
stenAanden@feddit.dk · 1 pts · 260d
Whenever we restore nature we lose some farmland, human occupation, etc. Doesn't really mean there is a bad side.
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 261d
just wait until someone starts selling fake water to those areas.
Agent641@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 261d
Trees good, china bad.
BilboBargains@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 261d
It comes from chy-nah?
GraveyardOrbit@lemmy.zip · 7 pts · 261d
BilboBargains@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 260d
Skating dangerously close to the naturalistic fallacy with your stupid comment. Ecological changes from any source could be catastrophic for life on earth, people are not a necessary precondition.
lefaucet@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 261d
Imagine if China will started paying Northern Africa to regreen in order to create air rivers that land in the north.
CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 260d
I wonder how much of that percentage is influenced by those areas China was spray painting green to make it look like a forest
stenAanden@feddit.dk · -2 pts · 261d
Uh oh... SOMEONE is not gonna like this. For some reason.