Also interesting to note: the heavy use of nitrogen fertiliser is also one of the reasons for the biodiversity crisis. Which according to some is a problem just as serious as the climate crisis, but is much less reported on in global media. Basic principle for the operation: plants which thrive well on nitrogen (think fast-growing grasses, nettles, ...) get an advantage over other plants (typically slower growing long-living flowering plants) because the fertiliser doesn't simply stay in the location where it gets applied. More uniform vegetation then produces the typical chain reaction (simplified): less insects, less food for birds, less birds, ... So tackling the problem mentioned in the article could have a positive influence both on climate and biodiversity.
It may be forgotten in some parts of the world, but certainly not in the Netherlands. Primarily because of the effects of nitrogen deposition on the environment and ammonia/methane in particular. There is basically a stop on building and expansion of agriculture as well as a reduction of the maximum speed on highways.
It's good to see this start to be part of the discussion.<p>To remind everyone; we're headed for a global calamity of unprecedented scale. We need to change our approach with regards to our life support system (i.e. the eco ecosystem) and how much damage we're doing to it.<p>Nature is resilient, very much so. Biological processes are resilient to an incredible degree. This has allowed humanity to do astonishingly destructive things without too many repercussions. Resilience has hidden most of the damage we've caused. But we're pushing it to the breaking point and pushing ever harder every year.<p>Human systems are not resilient. They are optimized for "efficiency". We've seen what disruptions even a relative harmless virus like Covid19 can do the the global economy.<p>People need to take these issues seriously and things need to change.
The most concerning source of nitrous oxide isn't even mentioned in the article and that's the thawing of the permafrost.<p>Thawing permafrost is releasing massive amounts of CO2, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide, and the thawing permafrost is locked into a positive feedback loop, the warmer it gets the more the permafrost thaws, the more greenhouse gases get released, causing it to get warmer.<p><a href="https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/06/harvard-chemist-permafrost-n2o-levels-12-times-higher-than-expected/" rel="nofollow">https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/06/harvard-chemi...</a><p>Positive feedback loops keep running until they exhaust their energy source, which in this case is locked up greenhouse gases in the frozen permafrost. The permafrost sequesters about double the amount of greenhouse gases that is currently in the atmosphere. 24% of the landmass of the northern hemisphere is permafrost, and it's also the areas of the world that are warming the fastest.<p>Let's also not talk about phytoplankton populations, which account for 50-80% of all the oxygen in the atmosphere, their population is declining due to ocean warming and acidification. When that population crashes, it will not only impact the oxygen levels in the atmosphere, but phytoplankton are the basis for the entire marine food chain, which 40% of all humans rely on for their main source of protein.<p>Melting glaciers, thawing permafrost, warming oceans, acidification of the oceans, phytoplankton population decline, these are all positive feedback loops that have started due to human's releasing greenhouse gases. In 10-15 years the thawing permafrost will be outputting about the same amount of greenhouse gases as humans output, it won't be the same mix of chemicals, but it will have the same impact on warming.<p>Unless someone invents a technology that can capture and sequester abut 45 Billion metric tonnes per year of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere the positive feedback loops will keep chugging along. Unfortunately we only have until the phytoplankton population crashes to invent the greenhouse gases capture and sequestor technology, because once that population crashes and the associated oxygen they create crash, life on the surface of the earth for creatures that need oxygen will become untenable.
That's actually pretty interesting. That's been used in almost every agricultural land... Regenerative agriculture may save us from mayhem. We're heading towards extinction if we don't adapt
Is this actually forgotten in science or is just not part of the political discussion?<p>I.e. is it included in the models that scientists use to predict global warming?
Augmenta.ag fixes that
They use machine vision & hyperapectral cameras to estimate nitrogen on the leaves and accordingly spread more, less or no fertilizer.