Scientists blame Brazilian Amazon for contributing to global warming

Posted: May 1, 2021 by oldbrew in atmosphere, Emissions, research, trees
Tags: ,


Amazon Rainforest, near Manaus [image credit: Neil Palmer/CIAT @ Wikipedia]

Which is more likely: nature has got it wrong, or ‘scientists’ (which ones) have got it wrong?
– – –
The Global Warming Policy Forum & AFP reporting:

The Brazilian Amazon released nearly 20 percent more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere over the last decade than it absorbed, according to a stunning report that shows humanity can no longer depend on the world’s largest tropical forest to help absorb man-made carbon pollution. [Talkshop comment – ‘carbon pollution’ is a man-made fiction].

From 2010 through 2019, Brazil’s Amazon basin gave off 16.6 billion tonnes of CO2, while drawing down only 13.9 billion tonnes, researchers reported Thursday in the journal Nature Climate Change.

The study looked at the volume of CO2 absorbed and stored as the forest grows, versus the amounts released back into the atmosphere as it has been burned down or destroyed.

“We half-expected it, but it is the first time that we have figures showing that the Brazilian Amazon has flipped, and is now a net emitter,” said co-author Jean-Pierre Wigneron, a scientist at France’s National Institute for Agronomic Research (INRA).

“We don’t know at what point the changeover could become irreversible,” he told AFP in an interview.

The study also showed that deforestation — through fires and clear-cutting — increased nearly four-fold in 2019 compared to either of the two previous years, from about one million hectares (2.5 million acres) to 3.9 million hectares, an area the size of the Netherlands.

Full report with link to AFP here.

  1. Chaswarnertoo says:

    The Amazon rain forest was NEVER the lungs of the planet. Have we reached peak stupidity yet?

  2. saighdear says:

    Yawning or sighing .. The more you look / search for something, the more you find: even rubbish. sometimes, it is a fortuitous way of tidying up, other times it causes mayhem in the yard. 0h where to put all this stuff I’ve found. Something else to research when it’s a rainy day …

  3. AC Osborn says:

    Do they actually think we believe that they can measure the inputs and outputs, guesstimates or modelling all the way.

  4. pameladragon says:

    Wanna bet none of these guys have actually done any research/observations in the Amazon? Model output is NOT data. Someone needs to get this idea across.

  5. Kip Hansen says:

    Bloke ==> The original report if from AFP, the French press agency. AFP is a partner of the Covering Climate Now climate-crisis propaganda cabal — intentionally publishing misleading stories about climate. Although the researchers clearly state that the Amazon Basin is probably “carbon neutral”, AFP adds in:

    “The Amazon rainforest is one of a dozen so-called “tipping points” in the climate system.

    Ice sheets atop Greenland and the West Antarctic, Siberian permafrost loaded with CO2 and methane, monsoon rains in South Asia, coral reef ecosystems, the jet stream — all are vulnerable to point-of-no-return transitions that would radically alter the world as we know it. “

  6. ivan says:

    Maybe they should be looking at it from the point of view the the earth is saying it needs more CO2 in the atmosphere to help plants grow.

    Nothing in nature happens in a vacuum and anything mankind tries to do against that will be negated – man tries to cut CO2 in the atmosphere, nature releases it from somewhere else.

  7. gds44 says:

    Reblogged this on Gds44's Blog.

  8. Curious George says:

    “Using new methods of analysing satellite data developed at the University of Oklahoma, the international team of researchers also showed for the first time that degraded forests were a more significant source of planet-warming CO2 emissions that outright deforestation.”

    Unbelievable, how a deforestation of 0.1% of the rainforest area, can lead to a catastrophe. The end is nigh.

  9. stpaulchuck says:

    no consideration of the science fact that humans contribute about 3.5% of ALL the so-called greenhouse gases, in particular CO2. So even if you wiped us out there’d still be net gain CO2. I’m more concerned about the current likely solar minimum which could lead to another LIA.

  10. Mišo Alkalaj says:

    And it’s all Joel Bolsanaro’s fault who became president on January1, 2019.

    Bullshit. “From 2010 through 2019” actually refers the period of available data. In reality, fast growth rainforests always emit more CO2 than they sequester, not just in the Amazon but all over the world.

    If the AGW fanatics could see past their ideology, they would be asking themselves WHY these rainforests grow where the do. High temperatures and abundant rainfall are part of the requirement, but overabundance of CO2 is also necessary since the C in the aerial CO2 in the prime structural element of plants. Now (as anybody who has done any gardening) knows living and decaying plant matter is mostly acidic and consequently water (rain) flowing through or over it becomes acidic. Acid dissolves calcium carbonate rock thereby releasing CO2. Lo and behold: luxuriant growth rainforests grow on calcium carbonate grounds all over global tropics.


  11. Phoenix44 says:

    Wow shocking. People looking for story about how things are terrible find it’s terrible.

    As ever I would bet £100 that a couple of small changes to their assumptions would reverse the “finding”.

  12. Oortcloud says:

    No one had ever measured the CO2 output. It was ASSUMED that the Amazon basin was a net CO2 sink. Well that’s made an ASS out of Jean-Pierre Wigneron, but not out of ME.

  13. dennisambler says:

    “The Amazon River outgasses nearly an equivalent amount of CO2 as the rainforest sequesters on an annual basis due to microbial decomposition of terrigenous and aquatic organic matter.

    The Amazon River is a major source of CO2 to the atmosphere, but understanding the interplay between photosynthesis and respiration is critical for understanding the fundamental mechanisms driving these fluxes and the overall productivity of the ecosystem.

  14. hunterson7 says:

    So glad you pointed out the mind dumbing phrase, “carbon pollution”
    One way to push back against the zombie army of climate extremists is to start qualifying their mantra words:
    “carbon pollution”, “climate change”, “climate emergency”, “global warming”, “settled science”, “renewable energy”, etc.
    None of those deceptive terms should be allowed to be used at face value.
    A small step but a real step.
    Thank you for all you do.

  15. Gamecock says:

    Old Man River, that Old Man River
    He must know somethin’, but he don’t say nothin’
    He keeps on rollin’, he just keeps rollin’ along

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s