Critics of Raining Forests : Project Earth : Discovery Channel

Critics' Voices

There are a number of objections to aerial reforestation — the main one being the use of aircraft. Critics cite the irony of creating a huge carbon footprint while trying to save the world.

While it's true the flights are creating a large carbon footprint once, supporters counter that these forests will last hundreds of years. Clearly, it's crucial to plant trees only in the right locations — areas that in their natural state would always have a large tree cover.

Environmental groups such as Greenpeace believe that any tree planting is "SOP" (standard operating procedure). They argue that when tree planting is presented as a solution to climate change, it merely encourages people to continue emitting greenhouse gases in the mistaken belief that they can compensate for their emissions with trees. This means that tree planting schemes that are marketed as helping the climate actually make the problem worse.

As for the trees themselves, many question why scientists are using aircraft to seed mangroves specifically. Mangroves seed themselves by dropping off the parent plant and floating downriver. Why not just use boats?

The answer is that the task force is proving a concept – the principle can apply for all trees. Also, if the delivery mechanism is right, then the distribution will be better than it would be in the random natural process.

Aerial reforestation has been tried with mangrove seedlings before, but the seeds weren’t properly protected by a canister, with mud, soil, etc., to give them a good chance of growing.

Finally, it's easy to object on the grounds of cost or practicality. Aerial reforestation would, of course, be hugely expensive.

CONTENT

Project Earth

Lab Book: Raining Forests

Critics' Voices

MORE FORESTS

Shop Discovery Store