{"id":2546,"date":"2022-04-21T12:45:37","date_gmt":"2022-04-21T12:45:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatetransform.com\/?p=2546"},"modified":"2022-07-05T16:04:18","modified_gmt":"2022-07-05T16:04:18","slug":"forestation-efforts-across-the-world","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatetransform.com\/forestation-efforts-across-the-world\/","title":{"rendered":"Forestation Efforts Across the World"},"content":{"rendered":"
In 2019, the government of Ethiopia undertook a challenge to plant four billion trees in just three months. Since the 1950s, the country\u2019s forest cover has fallen from around 40 percent of its land to just 15 percent.<\/span>1<\/sup><\/a><\/span> Ethiopia\u2019s achievement also spurred other countries to take forestation seriously and make similar commitments.<\/span>2<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n Scientists largely agree that planting new trees is beneficial for the local environment and the planet. But, the debate does not end there. Is it better to plant new trees or to let forests regrow?<\/span>3<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Is it ok to balance deforestation<\/a> in one region by planting trees in another? The problem is that deforestation is costly for the planet too. It releases the carbon that trees have stored back into the atmosphere. Keeping that CO2 sequestered and away from the atmosphere is important, scientists say<\/a>.<\/span>4<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Moreover, new forests<\/a> may also be less efficient at absorbing carbon dioxide from the air. This may be because smaller plants are known to absorb less CO2 than older trees. In other words, it is better for the climate to keep trees standing rather than constantly replacing them.<\/span>5<\/sup><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n This is why forestation in one region cannot always be balanced out with deforestation elsewhere.<\/span><\/p>\nForestation vs. deforestation: Why one cannot balance the other<\/h2>\n