"If [Bala and colleagues'] physics and climatology modeling is correct, it's going to have some pretty big implications," he said.
Forest preservation and reforestation efforts are still critical for mitigating global warming, Bala and colleagues caution.
But "our first hypothesis was that the benefit of planting trees cannot be uniform everywhere."
In addition to their conclusion about northern forests, the team found that planting more trees in mid-latitude locales—including most of the United States and Europe—may have little effect on climate change.
"Planting trees in the tropics gives you the maximum benefit if you want to slow down global warming," Bala said.
Laurance, of the Smithsonian, said that "from the perspective of biodiversity and conservation, tropical forests are the most biologically important real estate anywhere.
"So from that perspective it's good news to highlight efforts for [protecting those forests].
"On the other hand it's also a bit disconcerting, because I know of so many reforestation efforts in temperate and boreal places like New Zealand and [efforts to curb deforestation in] Siberia," he added.
"It worries me a bit that there could potentially be a loss of momentum in initiatives to promote forest conservation and reforestation in temperate areas [because of this study]."
Bala's team notes that their research is only a first step toward understanding the roles of forests in complex climatic processes.
They also stress that widespread deforestation would cause ecological devastation and is not a viable option for keeping global warming in check.
"The destruction of ecosystems to prevent global warming," the team wrote in their paper, "would be a counterproductive and perverse strategy."
Free Email News Updates
Best Online Newsletter, 2006 Codie Awards
Sign up for our Inside National Geographic newsletter. Every two weeks we'll send you our top stories and pictures (see sample).
|
SOURCES AND RELATED WEB SITES
|
