Acrobatic-Rate4271

Acrobatic-Rate4271 t1_j6joyg7 wrote

It's not so much "pro US" as "pro geopolitical stability". When nations just start annexing each other willy-nilly it becomes vastly more difficult to have stable world trade. The point is to demonstrate to anyone else with similar ideas (China) that they risk becoming an economic pariah on the world stage.

Currently India is undermining that object lesson and, instead, demonstrating that there will always be some nation willing to trade with the aggressor regardless of how heinous their crimes.

−9

Acrobatic-Rate4271 t1_iuihiew wrote

Yes, it's good that we're planting trees but something to keep in mind is that photosynthesis (the reaction that consumes CO2 and produces O2) occurs in the leaves so older, more mature trees consume more CO2 and product more oxygen than younger trees. Even with replanting, the cutting of old growth trees and rain forests results in a net loss in CO2 capture and conversion to O2 unless your replanting significantly more trees than you're cutting. This also ignores the loss of undergrowth associated with logging.

I'm not saying we need to stop all logging, just pointing out that it's not as straightforward as it seems on initial inspection.

1

Acrobatic-Rate4271 t1_iuib4dn wrote

That's mostly because originally logging didn't replant trees and so a hundred years ago our tree stock was down from previous levels. States began legislating that logging required replanting so we're starting to get back to pre-logging levels but a plane flight over states like Oregon will give you an idea of just what clearcutting did to our forests before replanting was required by law.

0

Acrobatic-Rate4271 t1_iudz8hu wrote

12