Forrest Fleischman

"Therefore, we recommend that ecosystem restoration is pursued primarily for restoring biodiversity, supporting livelihoods and resilience of ecosystem services"

Limited carbon sequestration potential from global ecosystem restoration - Nature Geoscience The maximum carbon sequestration potential from global terrestrial ecosystem restoration efforts until 2100 is 96.9 Gt, which is equivalent to 3.7–12.0% of anthropogenic emissions until then, accordin...

"if we plan restoration targets to match future climatic conditions and consider state transitions of currently natural ecosystems due to climate change, the potential for natural climate solutions related to ecosystem restoration is close to zero." www.nature.com/articles/s41...

This is very bad. Although entirely predictable. Once more the humanities are being cut back to prop up STEM and, increasingly, AI investment (including at the expense of bench science). In the past, cuts to humanities were promoted on two separate logic streams that do not hold true: /1

Drawing on data from over 400 forest plantations in Himachal Pradesh, India, we show that improved forest outcomes (increasing forest cover, improved forest-based livelihoods) are strongly associated with long-term participation by local people in decision-making. iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1...

Internal Agency Memo Calls for Political Reviews of Solar, Wind Projects The widely circulating document lists more than 68 activities newly subject to upper-level review.

Huge: An internal Interior Department memo that I’ve reviewed shows the agency may soon subject *any* activities related to wind and solar to heightened levels of political review.

It threatens to delay renewables projects across the country, including those not on federal lands.

#greensky

Mapping previously undetected trees reveals overlooked changes in pan-tropical tree cover - Nature Communications Accurate tree cover mapping is vital for fighting climate change and land degradation. This high-resolution study reveals that 17% of pan-tropical tree cover was previously undetected, with over half ...

We're missing the trees by focusing on the forest!

Bus stop with sign advertising aid from China

Some countries understand soft power (photo from a newly built highway in Malawi)

Can someone from Indiana explain why the list of 100 programs eliminated at IU includes the PhD program in public policy (my PhD program) which according to my records was eliminated in 2017 (from my emails with the dean at the time, for good reasons)?

I have yet to hear of a housing development really affected in any way by MEPA, but apparently this happens all the time with CEQA?

In my own area, I recall that CEQA requires environmental analysis for each single private timber harvest plan, but MEPA did one single EIS for all forestry in the state back in 1994, and its done.

The article mentioned Minnesota, which is also tweaking MEPA, however MEPA seems to require far less for private projects.

The NYT article on the CEQA amendments implies that other states are next, however as far as my experience tells me, no other state requires the level of analysis CEQA requires for private projects. Is this correct?

I think if you were actually trying to produce all your own food in a space like this in most agroecosystems in North America, you would mostly be growing potatoes.

Should (or Could) Trump Be Added to Mount Rushmore? Let’s review how we got here, and closely examine what the rock would allow.

Seems like adding Trump to this sculpture would open up fissures in the rock which might lead to the whole monument collapsing. Its almost like poetry. www.nytimes.com/interactive/...

This reminds me that as an undergrad at Stanford, Theil, who had graduated several years before, was still functionally running the campus conservative newspaper and hanging out with the undergrad staff (several of who were my friends).

Imagine killing children.

For example, How Big Things Get Done shows how specific aspects of project management make a big difference in getting things done. Its not just "regulation" or vision, its how your organize. Its public administration.

Which is an actual in depth analysis of how to do big things efficiently, as opposed to a somewhat cobbled together political manifesto. It leads to some of the same lessons but also some different ones.

If you actually want to read a book that tells you about how to do big things in society, I recommend the much better book "How Big Things Get Done" sites.prh.com/how-big-thin...

The book actually talks about this! but they kind of drop the ball on it.

I think their diagnosis is confused because I don't think sclerotic regulation is causing what they think it causes. I think social conflict is causing it, and regulation is a tool.

I wish they'd do more exploration of comparative cases. Spain has environmental regulations too, but they built a ton of mass transit at low cost, while the US did not. Why?

YIMBY's are a recognizable coalition within left politics in many cities in the US, so are NIMBYs. I wish they'd be more specific about who they have a problem with and what their politics are. I just find the book confusing because of this.

Anyone who lives in a modern US city is aware that democrats, progressives, etc., are broad categories, and in reality there are often 2 or 3 distinct factions within these.

They spend alot of time assigning blame, but they are always vague about their categories.

one interpretation might be that environmentalism is fundamentally conservative, not "liberal" whatever they mean by that.

I should have realized it before, but I learned from the book that Reagan signed CEQA as governor of California.

They keep blaming things on leftists, democrats, and/or progressives, which are all very vague categories. They want to change "leftist" environmental laws, but as they themselves point out, most of these laws were bipartisan and signed into law by the notorious leftist... Richard Nixon!

I'm trying to listen to Abundance. Its interesting and I find myself agreeing with more of it than I thought I would, but I find the politics confusing.

I suppose today's moral is that leftist candidates can win if they run against really unpopular people who run poor campaigns?