|
The Arctic and Antarctic are quite different and not equivalent. The Arctic is water surrounded by land, and the Antarctic is land surrounded by water. The Antarctic is colder because it gets much less sunlight. The ocean and weather currents are quite different - and there is more moisture in the atmosphere (about 5% more) because of greater evaporation. This leads to more precipitation and when it is cold enough that precipitation is snow. More snow in Antarctica means more ice coverage; for the time being.
So a small gain of ice and snow coverage in Antarctica doesn't disprove global warming, nor is it "balancing" the melting that is happening in the Arctic.
On the carbon sequestration front; this is yet another huge advantage of organic perennial agriculture - plants would improve the soil by sequestering carbon both in the soil and in the plants themselves. Chemical fertilizer in soil stops the natural processes so the soil is depleted rather than improved, and the plants only live for a season so that carbon is released into the atmosphere right away.
So, if we change our agriculture to largely perennial organic we get numerous advantages:
We save fuel. We save water, and stop depleting the fossil water aquifers. We save the soil. We don't pollute the waterways, and we would not have dead zones in the ocean. We don't create nitrous oxide; a powerful GHG which accounts for about 25% of climate change. We sequester carbon at the same time as we reduced burning fossil fuel. We get more diverse, more nutritious, better tasting food; which gives us better health. We employ lots of people in dignified, satisfying, and rewarding work. Local food supplies are safer, and the local economy is greatly improved. Our food supply would be much more resilient to droughts, etc.
What's not to like?
|