Question:
Can we save humanity as we know it by cutting down all the world's forests?
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Can we save humanity as we know it by cutting down all the world's forests?
Sixteen answers:
2007-05-11 00:20:22 UTC
That, is a dumb idea. While decomposing plant matter produces CO 2, as well as methane, the trees also help clean the air. Our exhale of CO 2 is their "oxygen" so to speak. They use the CO2 in their production of nutrients to live, and release oxygen.

I have no idea what your past education has been, but that was early grade school stuff for me when I was a kid.

Better, at least in the short run is to reduce our use of oil. We need to make the net gain of CO 2 as close to 0 as we can get it. That means using fuel sources that are growing now, rather than what we dig, or pump out of the ground. So far as coal is concerned, most of the polluting gases could be locked up if fluidized bed combustion was used, plants that use coal were refitted with these combustors, and limestone was used to chemically lock up the pollutants. This is known, and very viable technology.
nckros191
2007-05-10 16:22:22 UTC
From what I have heard, trees do not produce CO2 but breathe it like we breathe Oxygen. Also i have heard that the trees expel Oxygen. So from what i know, humans are probably the #1 source of CO2 gases. If anything we should plant more evergreens. Those are the type of trees that can remove polution from the soil therefore making the planet healthy again. So everyone go out and plant some trees.
Jae
2007-05-10 19:08:53 UTC
If we cut down all of the trees to do that, what do you think the trees that we cut down would become? Ding, ding, ding!!! That's right!! Decomposing plant matter! And then, there would be hardly any vegetation left (except grass and flowers) to soak up that CO2 that was expelled by all of the trees in the world that we cut down. And then, ignorant people (I'm thinking someone in particular) would not be around because there would be more CO2 than oxygen for them to breathe. And then all of humanity, and everything else that consumes oxygen, would die.



Thank you.
vdpphd
2007-05-11 01:32:39 UTC
The evidence is such that the cause of the increase of one degree centigrade in average earth surface temperatures over the past 250 years is over 90% certain to be the doubling of the concentration of CO2 in the lower atmosphere. However, there is a global carbon cycle, explained in every first year class in Ecology, that must be understood in order to know how to lower CO2 concentrations.



Living plants consume CO2 and water and exude oxygen. Decomposers consume oxygen and dead plants to produce CO2 and water. These effects are, generally speaking, in balance. However, if plant matter does not decompose, because it becomes fossilized, the carbon in it gets buried in the ground, becoming, coal, oil, and natural gas, and lowering atmospheric concentrations of CO2. Back in the so-called Carboniferous Era, about 500 million years ago, more or less, Earth was significantly warmer, plant life was more lush, sea level was higher, large shallow inland seas existed on most continents, and large amounts of dead plant matter were fossilized. Eventually, under colder conditions, perhaps due to the removal of the CO2 from the air, permanent ice formed, sea levels dropped, shallow seas disappeared, less plant material was buried unrotted, and, by early human prehistory, only the occasional bog or marsh collected significant amounts of undecayed hydrocarbons.



In the beginning of human civilization, only currently produced hydrocarbons, wood and animal wastes, were used as fuel, so burning and decomposition were roughly in balance with carbon fixation by plant growth. However, about 400 years ago, rocks that burned were discovered and developed as sources of fuel, and mankind started returning to the atmosphere the CO2 that was fixed during the Carboniferous. Since 1750, the CO2 concentration has been doubled, although it is still lower than it was during the early Carboniferous. That doubling has increased average earth surface temperatures about one degree Centigrade, still cooler than what it was during the early Carboniferous.



Removing all trees will not remove CO2 from the atmosphere, it will add CO2 to the atmosphere. We need, not fewer trees, but more of them, and less burning of fossil fuels. There were no ice caps or glaciers during the Carboniferous, sea levels were much higher, and dry land was much scarcer. We barely have enough dry land to support our civilization at present - we cannot afford to lose any of it. More than one third of the world's population lives less than twenty meters above sea level - if we do not prevent the ice from melting, all those people will have to move uphill, somewhere, and much of the cropland that grows their food will be inundated by the sea. The cure for global warming is increased carbon fixation and decreased combustion of fossil fuels. Up to now, deforestation has had net negative effects in this regard.
2007-05-10 19:57:08 UTC
It is true that decaying plant matter is the leading creator of CO2. However, if we cut down all the forests:



a) there wouldn't be anything left to create oxygen for us to breath, which would defeat the purpose of cutting them down, to save human kind, because we would all suffocate



b) the lives of countless species would be lost most likely resulting in the extinction of many of those species which would screw the entire ecosystem causing everything to die, again defeating the purpose of cutting down the trees to begin with



c) once you have cut down the trees what do you expect to do with them? they would just add to the decaying matter already there and no you could not burn it because that would create so much smoke the atmosphere would be ruined, which was the exact opposite reason we cut down the trees, to save it, and we would all freeze to death and be smothered because we would be breathing smoke and the smoke would block out the sun causing eternal night and the stopping of heat reaching the surface causing the temperature to keep dropping until eventually no living thing could possibly survive.



in other words, cutting down all the forests in the world would just make things a lot worse.
SomeGuy
2007-05-10 16:56:13 UTC
You have really crappy ideas. While decomposing plant matter does contribute to the greenhouse effect, it has virtually no effect whatsoever on global warming. I should also point out that trees absorb far more CO2 than they emit, so cutting them down would only exacerbate the problem.
Jobs_141
2007-05-10 17:38:17 UTC
Impossible.



Trees breathe in CO2 and produce oxygen. Humans breathe in oxygen and produce CO2. Without trees, nothing will breathe in CO2 to produce oxygen. Without oxygen, we will be facing a mass extinction of ourselves.



Oh, and it's the decomposing bacteria that produce CO2 and not the decaying plant itself.
gorans
2016-10-15 11:50:50 UTC
The lifeless Flag Blues- GY!BE the motor vehicle's on fireplace and there is not any driving force on the wheel And the sewers are all muddied with one thousand lonely suicides And a depressing wind blows the government is corrupt And we are on maximum of drugs With the radio on and the curtains drawn we are trapped in the tummy of this terrible device And the device is bleeding to death The solar has fallen down And the billboards are all leering And the flags are all lifeless on the main suitable of their poles It went like this The homes tumbled in on themselves mothers clutching babies picked throughout the rubble and pulled out their hair The skyline became into proper on fireplace All twisted steel stretching upwards each and every thing washed in a skinny orange haze I pronounced, "Kiss me, you're proper.. those are quite the final days" You grabbed my hand and we fell into it Like a daydream or a fever We awoke one morning and fell somewhat extra down for specific that's the valley of death I open up my wallet And that's full of blood
2007-05-10 22:38:57 UTC
you are suggesting to kill of the life on this planet ,this is much more a violation than jokingly suggest to use you for Human sacrifice ,

to object to that can only mean that you are a traitor and an enemy of the planet as well as being hypocritical

there is a lot of sacrifice going on in the USA and thousands of women and children have been bombed by your troops ,is this not a violation .??



and in my original text there was nothing that was against the comunity guide lines

not swearing ,no rascism.no insults



you people can dish out the violence and murder but you cant take it if someone else suggests it .





apart from that what about democratic principles

about tolerating other religios principles



all of this is assuming that you pushed the abuse button ,if you did not

i take all of this back ofcourse



removing the trees means the death of all of life on this planet ,

no air.no water to drink.no food

,an impossible dessert climate ,

burning days ,and freezing nights

the idea is just to mad to leave

unattacked
lildude211us
2007-05-10 16:19:11 UTC
NO.



If we chop down all the trees in the world, there will be less oxygen and more CO2 in the air. Trees are a big source for oxygen because there are a lot of leaves on a tree and every leaf takes in the CO2 and turns it into oxygen. With the trees gone, there wont be a lot of things that can convert a huge amount of CO2 into oxygen and all the CO2 that is released by respiration and man made stuff would just be in the air.
Old-Fashioned Royalty
2007-05-10 15:24:40 UTC
Who would create the oxygen then? And the shade? And not to mention the hundreds of animals species that would die out because their natural habitats have been chopped down, which would affect the entire food chain and animal population, including humans.
?
2007-05-10 15:25:59 UTC
tress provide all oxygen for humans and absorb C02 to create oxygen. we should be planting more trees. tress cool us and oxygenate the air and make life possible. tress are essential to life. what would be breathe without trees? what would be eat withot plants? where would all the animals go? what the hell man.
pirate00girl
2007-05-10 15:23:47 UTC
you think the summer months are hot now?? just see how hot it will get with all the trees gone.



i live in the middle of many nut tree farms. when i come home from "town," the air temp. drops at least 15-20 degrees as i cross the orchard green belt.
Radhakrishna( prrkrishna)
2007-05-10 16:58:18 UTC
DON'T YOU KNOW THAT THE TREES ARE CALLED OXYGEN GENERATORS?



IF ALL TREES ARE GONE WHERE FROM YOU GET THE OXYGEN YOU BREATHE.



what A FUNNY IDEA GENTLEMAN? DO YOU THINK IT WILL BE COOLER THEN AROUND YOUR HOUSE IN PARKS WITH NO TREES?
A Randome Person
2007-05-10 17:15:34 UTC
um your not making sense coz if you chop down the trees that means there dead so they then rot. if u keep them alive they won't rot coz they're alive.



also what you say may be true but we're not helping by driving cars, and burning coal. so instead of killing trees that absorb c02 and give us oxygen we could save energy and carpool
2007-05-10 17:08:19 UTC
did you forget that living plants are the number one producer of OXYGEN... The gas in which HUMANITY breathes??? if you cut down all the plant matter in the world, you are destroying earths lungs and humanity at the same time.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...