Ocean phytoplankton and algae produce 70-80% of the earths atmospheric oxygen. Why is tree conservation for oxygen so popular over ocean conservation then?
In: Biology
With the declining birth rates and increasing rate of members of the senior population passing away, would the oxygen levels find themselves somewhat rebalancing towards a positive status, as will the overall environment?
Not sure if someone mentioned this, but on top of they’re familiarity and importance to the atmosphere, they’re a valuable resource. Think of all the wooden objects you may have nearby, from floors and tables to instruments and infrastructure. Losing trees would be detrimental to the economy just because of how versatile it is from a business perspective.
Forget the oxygen, the main issue is biodiversity – having lots of different species of plants, animals, microbes.
Trees are not there to just produce oxygen, they also create a habitat for other living beings.
Life it self is important.
I have had a lecture by a very high ranked marine biologist who actually mentioned this. What they would do is throw manure-like material into the ocean, so that algae would grow and CO2 levels in the atmosphere would decrease. This worked extremely well, however it came with a lot of side affects, one of which was attracting species of algae we definitely did not want. Hence this project has stopped, as it is too unpredictable and has too many negative side effects. However, perhaps it will be used in the future again, once the problem gets more severe and we start running out of options.
It’s dual purpose: it they release oxygen, but also retain water in the soil. Kill off the trees, and over time it affects precipitation patters. This can be devastating to farming and municipal water supplies.
In actuality, from someone who’s In the field of conservation, it’s mainly about money. We need to produce more trees than needed so we can turn them over and make a profit. So we can use them to fund other conservation projects.
In reality we have more trees in the United States now than we did in the 1800s. We really don’t need to focus on tree restoration unless we want to focus on restoration of extinct or near extinct species. The need to chain one selves to a tree disappeared by early 1960 when people started thinking they were smarter than people who do the constant research and know how to balance an ecosystem.
Tree conservation now needs to focus on the un- needed destruction of existing environments. Like our Coral reefs or the destruction of entire forests that are not being replanted.
It all boils down to money. You unfortunately can’t do anything without money. Especially in the conservation field. It’s easier to market replanting trees when you can turn over each individual tree for more than a 1000$ dollars is cultivated properly on a small 20 Acre plot. You can’t market phytoplankton restoration. It costs alot of money to restore a small habitat and expecting no to little monetary gain is not enough to bring in companies to fund it.
The sad fact is is that we are not to the stage where we can restore what needs to be restored. Simply because money rules the world.
Conservation is not conservation. Its people/money/public opinion management. You need money to get the idea of ocean restoration out their. That’s why shows like blue earth or our planet have had great effects on conservation in general. It gets people to donate. Which is needed. You can do your part by going to parks and donating. Especially those you are interested in. Or spend money on wildlife agency funded scuba dives or things like that. They all need funding. And that is the number one way to help. Just please .. please don’t donate to companies like Peta or ones that focus on saving the trees. The trees are saved. They are all for profit organizations even if they state they aren’t.
Do your part, buy a hunting/fishing license and contribute to the conservationists doing the work needed. And better yet. Vote. Vote for those that have those best interests in heart and not in pocket. Help move us away from a monetary focus and towards a humanity focus.
AFAIR it’s a bit hard to boost phytoplankton production. You need to seed it with iron / minerals from the land. Usually this gets taken care of by the winds. But if you want to manually seed it, the process will produce more CO2 than you will sequester this way. Trees are a lot easier to work with.
The first episode of One Strange Rock goes into this exact topic! (Sorry to not answer directly, but it’s a great show on Netflix and has an easily accessible first episode on oxygen creation)
A 5 year old can touch a tree safely, look at the huge height difference between a 5 yr old, run around and around a tree, they inspire awe… try doing any of those with plankton.
It’s unlikely that most parents know about planktons oxygen production either.
It’s also easily visible (mostly) when something is made of wood, what can you point to in every day life that is made of plankton.
Most people if they can’t touch it and feel it and see it has value, don’t even think about it.
But we should.
Went to a talk on this a few weeks ago, had no idea until then how much we realised on the algae etc for O2.
Latest Answers