Skip to main content

June 30, 2009 – First of all, my apologies for the dark print in my last post. I realize this is very difficult to read. I’m not sure what caused this! Perhaps enlarging the font will make it easier to read. Again, I’m sorry that happened.

I referred, in my last post, to the Sahara and Gobi Deserts. When I said they were advancing I meant, of course, that they were expanding. The expansion, in both cases, is caused by irrigation and animal grazing, activities associated with farming. Different types of land can support different amounts of irrigation and grazing. Clay soils, sandy soils, cannot support as much as top soil containing humus. Dry soils which are over-irrigated become salty, then parched. Over-grazed land gradually loses the vegetation that holds soil in place. An over-abundance of these activities occurs when too many people are trying to eke a living out of soil meant to support fewer people. The result is desertification.

This is what has taken place in both Africa and China. In each case, the decision has been made to fight back by planting trees. I don’t believe that the long-term results are yet known. The thinking, of course, is that the roots of the trees will stabilize the soil, thus preventing it from blowing away. Furthermore, the roots will form a vegetative mass below the ground over time. The roots and the trees they support will also hold water. Ultimately, the hope is that other plants will take root, allowing the stabilization process to progress. When this occurs, desertification has been reversed. The long-term solution to this problem must also include a decrease in the number of people farming marginal lands.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Time to be Scared

November 26, 2018 You've heard by now that the US Global Change Research Program released its Fourth National Climate Assessment last Friday. Scientists are, at last, confident enough to say that climate change is the new reality. How very much I wish they had published this bold assertion many years ago, rather than always being hesitant (" . . . we're 73% sure this could happen . . ."). While I know the politics involved cannot be allowed to sway them, and that scientists are unaccustomed to speaking for the masses, their inability to convince the scientifically uneducated of the value in climate change hypotheses has hurt us all. In any event, they have now spoken up loudly and clearly. According to NOAA, one of the 13 government agencies responsible for the Assessment, we can expect the following, should mitigating actions not be taken immediately: - Human health and safety, quality of life, and economic growth will all suffer.        The 2014 Assessment c...

A Rock and a Hard Place

October 8, 2012 - Such a pickle: we have the coal, but no longer want to burn it.  China wants the coal, but shouldn't burn it because of the resulting air pollution.  Coal mining companies in the U.S. are ready and waiting to ship their coal to China.  Citizens of the U.S. living on its west coast are adamant they want nothing to do with exporting coal.  That includes Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber.  Kitzhaber's April 25 letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar expresses his profound skepticism about shipping coal by way of Oregon's ports.  He has requested that a programatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) first be conducted for all five of the export projects currently being considered, as well as a comprehensive policy review.  Here is part of a press release announcing his letter: "I have concerns about proceeding in this direction [exporting coal to China via Oregon ports] in the absence of a full national discussion about the ramif...