When Climate Change Ecologists Are Wrong, They Are A Trillion Trees Wrong!

Reporting 05 July 2019 on the findings of Swiss scientists, journalist Elias Marat says, "Planting A Trillion Trees Is Fastest, Cheapest Way To Reverse Climate Change: Study" (The Mind Unleashed, themindunleashed.com):

According to the new study published in the journal Science, planting about a billion trees across the globe could remove two-thirds of all carbon dioxide emissions worldwide – approximately 25 percent of the CO2 in the atmosphere – creating a vast natural means to trap and store the emissions in an affordable and politically non-controversial manner.

Thus, Mr Marat happily says: "And now, scientists are urging the world to plant billions of trees wherever possible as the cheapest and most effective way to handle the climate crisis."

Billion, or trillion? Anyway, a natural, affordable, non-political solution – that should be perfect.

But it's not. It's a trillion trees imperfect.

In fact, it's Unscientific! Those Swiss ecologists are ignoring the growth patterns of trees!

You cannot plant an instant forest, like you can plant an instant garden. It will take you at least 10 years before you can claim you have planted a tree, or forests of some trillion trees.

No Sir, Mr Crowther. A little more than 2 months ago, I already debunked your theory. The solution is not to be found in Forestry, neither in Agriculture, but in Horticulture – I already wrote about this (see my essay, "F.A.H. – Which Science Can Save The World Now From Climate Change?" 05 May 2019, Journalism for Development, ijournalismfordevelopment.blogspot.com).

Yes, Sir, Mr Crowther, the fastest, cheapest way to reverse climate change is not to grow a forest but to plant a garden!

It's not the tree, per se, that gobbles up the carbon dioxide, CO2, in the air – it's the leaves, you know, the green ones coming out of all growing plants, shaped differently, sometimes beautifully?

So how do we grow those leaves the fastest and the cheapest way?

Forestry? No. This science is misconstrued. You cannot plant a tree; you can plant only a seedling, say with 10 little leaves. In 3 months, let's say 100 leaves. You have a forest of trees in 10 years, or 3,650 days. Even so-called "fast-growing tree species" are too slow to cope with climate change.

Agriculture? No. This science is definitely out. Monoculture is the one that got us into trouble with the climate in the first place.

Horticulture? Yes! You plant a garden of flowers or vegetables and in 100 days, you have thousands of leaves absorbing all that CO2 in the surrounding air. Flowers or vegetables in vacant lots in your backyard, your city, or your farm. No soil left bare anywhere. When green grows over soil, there is a climate change in that place. That's what we can get with gardens big or small.

Actually, I already pointed out something like that 5 months earlier (see my essay "The Greening Revolution! This Is How To Defeat Climate Change!" 24 February 2019, Journalism for Development, ijournalismfordevelopment.blogspot.com).

Mr Crowther, our unleashing trillion trees will bring trillion delays in fighting climate change!517