Climate Change

Peak Farmland Helps Solve Climate Change

It also protects and restores imperiled biodiversity.


Restoration of the Earth's forests is the world's most effective solution to climate change available today, argues a new study in Science. The researchers calculate that reforesting 900 million hectares of land—an area about the size of the United States—would draw more than 200 gigatons of carbon from the atmosphere. Such extensive reforestation would reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide by 25 percent, essentially lowering it back to the level of a century or so ago. The researchers calculate that the additional tree cover could be added without affecting existing forests, agricultural land, and cities. The study finds that more than half the potential to restore trees can be found in just six countries: Russia (151 million hectares); the United States (103 million); Canada (78 million); Australia (58 million); Brazil (50 million); and China (40 million).

Earlier research forecasting peak farmland projects that as much as 400 million hectares of farmland could revert to nature by 2060.

Land spare for nature
Peak Farmland

So much land reverting to nature would not only ameliorate the risks of climate change but also help protect and restore imperiled biodiversity.

The researchers in the Science article call for urgent global action. But it turns out that about half of their reforestation goals are already on the path to being realized as a result of market-driven technological progress that is boosting agricultural productivity.

NEXT: Trump Tells His Critics to 'Go Back' Where They 'Came From.' His Love-It-or-Leave-It Attitude Is Totally Wrong and Arguably Racist.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I live in California that has more trees and plant life than ever before per any study. Guess what that brings about fires and pest. Just sayin

    1. Describe pests, please

      1. Tree beetle to many trees attacks the pinetree beetle

    2. Because they aren't properly managed as per usual in coo coo Cali.

    3. Fire is natural, dawg. Forests need to burn once in a while.

      1. Or you can log the forest and utilize the value instead of let it go up in smoke

    4. > Guess what that brings about fires and pest.

      Gross forestry mismanagement? A mismanagement that dates back to even before Clinton doubled down on the mismanagement? And more recently by policies that forbade cutting down diseased and dead trees to eliminate both the pests and the fire hazards.

      Yes, global warming has a teensy weensy bit to do with it. Tiny. Trivial. But the bulk of the problem is gross mismanagement by the Federal and state governments.

  2. Global climate warming change is not a problem that needs solving.
    Leave the earth alone and it will continue to do what it has done sine it began. Get along just fine, with man, or without.
    Now quit looking for excuses to take over property.

    1. Since it began.
      But overall global temperatures (unadjusted, real temperatures) do reflect a sine wave - - - - -

    2. Yeah but that could mean the end of man.

  3. Wait, didn't we already do this in the 90's? If not, why the fuck was anybody listening to Sting after the Police?

    1. Carting that native chieftain in a cage all over the world was too cool to look away from.

  4. Wait until all the glaciers melt.

  5. Global greening is a thing. Thanks to global warming!

  6. I read somewhere the Industrial Revolution saved the planet. Plant life was on a decline and the extra CO2 saved it.

  7. The current (coalition) government in NZ is trying to plant a billion trees (in the next 10 years??).
    They are ahead of schedule apparently.
    At 160 trees per hectare (plantation forest trees/hectare) that's 6.25 million hectares worth.
    Not bad for a small country.

    I Youtube Challenge all other countries to do better or pour a bucket of ice cold water into your Tide Pods while undoing the lid of a bottle with your penis.

  8. Welch is on Kennedy talking about Democrat party fundraising and he brought up how much New Yorkers hate trump.

  9. Liga QQ merupakan Situs Dominoqq Online Terpercaya dan Bandarqq Online Terpercaya untuk itu dapatkan layanan terbaik dari kami Liga QQ bandar judi online terbaik -

  10. Wait! You mean to say we can solve the existential problem of climate change by the relatively simple, straightforward and relatively non-disruptive policy of reforestation, rather than by carbon taxes, cap and trade bureaucracies, massive subsidies for green industries, spending trillions upon trillions of dollars on a green new deal, and dismantling capitalism?

    This must be a mistake…

    1. Well, we have to reforest the entire US...

      I read that the sub Saharan African population is going to increase ten fold in the next 50 years, to approach a billion persons. I feel like that kind of population growth is worse than any deforestation in sheer amount of resources consumed.

  11. "Peak Farmland Helps Solve Climate Change"

    Linnekin should talk to you more about what farmers have been dealing with, Bailey. If you and he aren't copacetic, maybe try emailing soldiermedic, because I'm not sure how tapped in you are to the ag news.

    Never mind the stock market; you can't eat it after the farmers go bankrupt. (Not even with lots of garlic. Sad!)

  12. Yay! The climate will never change again! Thanks science!

  13. The problem is that planting trees and using cutting edge nuclear power does not shame affluent westerners, multiply government power, or even stamp out capitalism once and for all! Do you want to sit there and be pragmatic, or do you want to crush your enemies and foster your new religion?

    1. Hell, no! Never let truth, logic, data, or human liberty get in the way of your political agenda.

    2. "The problem is that planting trees and using cutting edge nuclear power does not shame affluent westerners"

      Mobilizing masses to plant trees has been a fave with dictatorial governments since the days of Adolf Hitler. Nuclear power came later, but it has also been popular with dictatorial powers. I wouldn't worry about them stamping out capitalism, though.

    3. + .333 "what is best in life"

  14. > about half of their reforestation goals are already on the path to being realized as a result of market-driven technological progress that is boosting agricultural productivity.

    To bad this post(to short to be an article) didn't go further in this, but simply ends there.

    Contrary to the anti-progress Left, affluence solves a lot of the worlds problems. Affluent people want clean air. Affluent people like trees. Affluent people like lots of trees. And they have the money to get them. The free market leads the direction. Not tariffs. Not taxes. Not micromanagement of trade. Not hand wringing. Not crying. And most certainly not good intentions.

    1. "Affluent people like trees. Affluent people like lots of trees. "

      Affluent people like good trees like oak, elm and maple. They wouldn't be caught dead with the shit trees that are reforested - poplar, pine and other such trash.

      1. Usually they like those trees to make up the chairs under their asses.

  15. I’m not sure how any of this is news. Satellite and other measurements have detected a consistent, substantial increase in global vegetation dating back 30 years. The earth is about 14% “greener” than it was in the 1980s, and crop yields continue to soar. Plants like CO2, so let’s keep giving it to them.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.