The study, recently published in the journal Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), details how NASA experts and their peers determined a stunning new way to conduct the normal «apples - to - apples» comparison between various forms of
vegetation as a carbon sink.
Not exact matches
The U.N. Convention to Combat Desertification estimates that soil,
as a
sink for
carbon dioxide, provides a larger reservoir than either
vegetation or the atmosphere, calling its sequestration capabilities «unparalleled.»
As for plants soaking up the excess, forests and other
vegetation are indeed major
carbon sinks that can absorb lots of
carbon — in other words, healthy forests could offset some of our global warming pollution.
He reasons that
as the ice recedes,
vegetation advances and normal photosynthesis starts acting
as a
carbon sink.
I never said that modest changes in
vegetation would act
as a
sink for all the
carbon emissions.
For the d13C levels of several parts of the
carbon cycle see: http://homepage.mac.com/uriarte/
carbon13.html There are only two sources of low d13C on earth: fossil fuels and
vegetation decay, but
as the biosphere is an overall
carbon sink, thus specifically a 12C
sink, it can't be a 13C
sink.
As for plants soaking up the excess, forests and other
vegetation are indeed major
carbon sinks that can absorb lots of
carbon — in other words, healthy forests could offset some of our global warming pollution.
If we stopped letting cattle graze on federal land and allowed the
vegetation there to naturally regrow, we'd save on emissions from lowered beef production and increase the capacity of the land to serve
as a
carbon sink.