Take a Hike
- Thread starter Odds
- Start date
Sponsored Links
When wildfire smoke is in the air, doctors urge people to stay indoors to avoid breathing in harmful particles and gases. But what happens to trees and other plants that can’t escape from the smoke?
Atmospheric and chemical scientists study the air quality and ecological effects of wildfire smoke and other pollutants. In a study that started quite by accident when smoke overwhelmed our research site in Colorado, they were able to watch in real time how the leaves of living pine trees responded.
What our months of data told us is that some plants respond to heavy bouts of wildfire smoke by shutting down their exchange with outside air. They are effectively holding their breath, but not before they have been exposed to the smoke. With wildfires increasing in severity and frequency due to climate change, forest management policies and human behavior, it’s important to gain a better understanding of the impact. @The Conversation
Atmospheric and chemical scientists study the air quality and ecological effects of wildfire smoke and other pollutants. In a study that started quite by accident when smoke overwhelmed our research site in Colorado, they were able to watch in real time how the leaves of living pine trees responded.
What our months of data told us is that some plants respond to heavy bouts of wildfire smoke by shutting down their exchange with outside air. They are effectively holding their breath, but not before they have been exposed to the smoke. With wildfires increasing in severity and frequency due to climate change, forest management policies and human behavior, it’s important to gain a better understanding of the impact. @The Conversation
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 44,067
- Reaction score
- 2,915
- Country
There are some countries who are making little effort. But surely it's better that the many countries who are making an effort continue to do so, rather than saying "**** it, they're not bothering, so we might as well not bother..."
I agree with this, however it's about striking a balance (in terms of the timescale to transition to new technologies etc) that is deemed reasonable by the majority of the public. At present there's a feeling we're being forced too quickly down routes that are sometimes more expensive for the consumer to implement.
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 44,067
- Reaction score
- 2,915
- Country
Alternatives that are better for the environment are often more expensive for the consumer.
This has been on tomorrow's world in the seventies, for Christ's sake.
Just how long do you want?
Your comment entirely misses my point. It's almost irrelevant how long something is 'talked about', it's the strategic direction and timescale of government and local councils that matter.
I'll give a random analogy. It might be talked about for 10 years that a certain bus route is no longer profitable. However if the bus company then suddenly announce they're closing said route in 3 months because of this, it doesn't give customers sufficient time to process the change and then implement whatever changes they need to make in their day to day life. Whereas if the bus company had made the same announcement 12 months previous, it gives that bit more time for customers to make different arrangements.
Yes the deadline targets for much of the environmental stuff are years away, however it can still be a struggle for some people (depending on income etc) to make the required changes in time.
When you see an issue then, you do nothing unless the government or council tells you to?
The 'bus company' was told a hundred years ago that society was outstripping its resources, so what difference another year makes is up to the government. Privatisation has clearly been culpable for much waste and a national effort is required to bring about the necessary changes now. The longer the issue is ignored and avoided, the more expensive it will become to correct the chronic mismanagement and profiteering of bean counters who cannot see the wood for the trees, blithely ignoring, discrediting and hiding the evidence presented to them in order to avoid public scrutiny and continue their lifestyle.
Now's your chance to take part in voting for the Woodland Trust’s 2024 Tree of the Year which is open until 21st October via the Woodland Trust website, with a winner announced on 29th October.
The 1,000 year old Bowthorpe Oak in Lincolnshire has my vote...
The 1,000 year old Bowthorpe Oak in Lincolnshire has my vote...
A tree reacts to the news from the UNs environmental chief that current carbon-cutting promises by countries for 2030 are not being met, according to the report, and even if they were met, the temperature rise would only be limited to a still-disastrous 2.6C to 2.8C. There is no more time for “hot air”, the report said, urging nations to act at the Cop29 summit in November.
No getting away from the burning irony but how else will folk get rid of all those unused pallets?And here we are approaching November the 5th
We’re bye thousands of bonfires are going to be lit across the UK
Sponsored Links