1

Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans

Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans in the 21st Century

Severa Kulenkamp

English 102

Professor Graham

Jun 12, 2022

Word Count:4229
2
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans

“Earth could cross the global warming threshold as soon as 2027,” claims the world

economic forum (2021). Global warming is a “gradual increase in the overall temperature of the

earth's atmosphere generally attributed to the greenhouse effect caused by increased levels of

carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons, and other pollutants,”(Online Dictionary). This is a natural

phenomenon that has substantially increased over the past century due to the start of the

industrial revolution. The four greenhouse gasses consist of carbon dioxide, methane,

chlorofluorocarbons, nitrous oxide, and people exert them every day. From driving cars, to

turning on the light, or cooking meals on the stove. That is exerting greenhouse gas. Greenhouse

gas works the same as a greenhouse. It absorbs the heat produced by the sun, holds onto it, and

doesn’t let it escape. By doing so, the heat is then trapped on earth, slowly raising the

temperature of earth’s core. Results of earth's temperature rising have displayed significant

increases in phenomena such as tsunamis, hurricanes, wildfires, air quality, melting of glaciers

which made the sea level heighten. A major contributor to global warming is ranching. Cows

produce a fourth of the greenhouse gasses from agriculture, primarily methane through digestion

and producing waste. Although tasty, an overabundance of livestock has a negative impact on

human heart-health as well as nature's heart. Methane may be produced in a smaller amount, but

the density and potency is stronger than the other gasses. Carbon dioxide is not as dense in the

atmosphere, but the contributing factors are far greater in size and population. In agriculture,

slash-and-burn methods are proven to redeem nitrogen in soil to produce a greater crop yield, yet

sources have presented that these fires spread and end up creating mass forest fires. Burning

down forests, as well logging resulting in detrimental deforestation results in depletion of

biodiversity, environmental growth, and an increase in wildfire risk. The most problematic factor
3
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
being the centuries of carbon dioxide absorbed by the trees rests within the vegetation. Once the

fire burns through the vegetation, millions tonnes of carbon dioxide is released into the

atmosphere. While solutions such as monoplanting come into play as restoration, biodiversity is

unable to thrive in the environment, leaving the new baby saplings unable to absorb the released

carbon dioxide, and the new vegetation consisting of shrubbery as a highly flammable source.

On a technological level, cars exuberate the main percent of carbon dioxide daily using a

non-renewable resource. Scientists are testing multiple methods of solution inventing an electric

car resulting in zero emissions while driving meaning zero carbon footprint. As a society relying

on fossil fuels, now is the time to realize the way of life now can not be the way of the future.

When global warming is irreversible within the next decades, quality of life begins to worsen,

living conditions are uncomfortable, or one's house is burned to the ground from a forest fire.

Now is the time for humans to work together to save the planet from overheating, keeping the

earth healthy.

Detrimental effects from global warming are impactfully rising provoking permanent

future

environmental change; human adjustment and modifications in daily habits and activities

is the only solution to the threat.

Throughout decades, data from observations and recordings of agricultural tactics and

techniques [slash-and-burn/livestock carbon dioxide production] are displaying penurious effects

on soil, air quality, crop productuction rates, and human health. Agricultural food production and

agricultural-related change in land use substantially contribute to greenhouse-gas emissions

worldwide. Of this, four-fifths arise from the livestock sector. Ruminant livestock, such as cows,

individually produce up to 250 pounds of methane a year through digestion and waste. Methane
4
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
has 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide over the first 20 years after it reaches the

atmosphere. Even though carbon dioxide has a longer-lasting effect, methane sets the pace for

the rate of global warming by containing a level of a greater potency and density by 28 percent

(Johnson 1995). It is estimated that the worldwide population of about two billion cows all

contribute four percent towards the total amount of gas emitted. According to Okshevsky (2020),

“Many factors influence methane emissions from cattle and include the following: level of feed

intake, type of carbohydrate in the diet, feed processing, addition of lipids or ionophores to the

diet, and alterations in the ruminal microflora,” (p,1). Other theories consist of feeding seaweed

to produce an enzyme reducing the methane, or taking a genetic approach in an adequate

scientist's case. A study published in 2019 found that the type and amount of methane-producing

bacteria found in a cow’s stomach is related to its genetic makeup. Knowing this, scientists can

breed cows that have less of these bacteria in their stomachs. This will eventually create a type of

genetically-modified cow that produces less methane (Okshevsky, 2020). Manipulation of these

factors can reduce methane emissions from cattle, yet humans could do the same. Although cows

are a well wanted food on the market, they aren’t the healthiest. They are high in saturated fats,

and with an overconsumption, one can increase their risk of cardiovascular disease (Nunnez,

2022). After observations and numerous studies, a compromise that would benefit both the

planet and humans would be cutting down on the livestock count. If farmers decreased livestock

production by 30% by 2030, this could lower the carbon dioxide footprint and emissions as well

as lower citizen risk of cardiovascular disease by 15%. With more room for growth, farmers

could take part in replenishing the soil for more heart-healthy produce (Friel, 2009).

Agricultural practices can impact both the amount and the composition of soil organic

carbon and hence also the soil’s physical, biological, and chemical condition, the combination of
5
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
things that defines soil health. Farm practices that affect carbon therefore impact agricultural

productivity and resilience (the soil’s ability to deal with weather extremes) and the carbon cycle

itself (Corning, 2016). Soil acts as sources and sinks for greenhouse gasses such as carbon

dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide . Since both storage and emission capacities may be large,

precise quantifications are needed to obtain reliable global budgets that are necessary for

land-use management (Oertel, 2016). Certain practices of retainment and salvaging, such as the

slash-and-cut method, are temporary actions that result in short-term solutions and long-term

consequential problems. As plants grow, enduring photosynthesis, the leafs absorb carbon

dioxide from the atmosphere continuing this action throughout its lifespan. Once complete, the

dead plant matter is decomposed and taken in by the soil (Dunne, 2020). Thus, locking in all the

carbon dioxide that consists of the deceased plant. This creates soil organic carbon, a very vital

substance for soil health. Actions of farmers often reduce the organic carbon amount when

aquestering greater amounts of land. Agricultural practice slash-and-cut method provides

temporary support to soil proving results often in mass deforestation, and reduction in viable

land from over emission of carbon dioxide. This action provides positive results in rejuvenating

soil displaying a greater rate of fertility, and the incarcerated biomass provides an increased

amount of nitrogen as well as other nurturing nutrients. Unintentionally, agricultural partakers

slash-and-cut too large of masses causing the spread of fire to interfere and catch onto the forest

averaging a loss in 50 acres an hour worldwide (Bennett, 2017). As the biomass burns even a

singular tree, “typical hardwood trees can absorb as much as 48 pounds of carbon dioxide per

year. This means it will sequester approximately 1 ton of carbon dioxide by the time it reaches 40

years old,” (CO2 measurement specialists, 2022). As fire catches in a mass area, the protective

forest canopy burns away exposing the forest floor. Exposed, especially during dry seasons, the
6
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
sun heat ray dries out the soil. When the soil dries out the heat intensifies the fire. This spirals

due to the production of smoke forming a cloud above. When the smoke hangs over the forest it

suppresses rainfall making it hard for the fire to stop. Without a decline of the spread of fire, this

causes the soil quality to deplete, as well as a production of carbon dioxide to increase with no

surrounding vegetation to filter or process it leaving a greater amount in the atmosphere (Malhi,

2008).

As the rise of this increasing problem occurs, farmers can implement multiple practices to

reduce risk of mass carbon dioxide and methane leakage. Farming practices that reduce

disturbance of the soil (less aeration from tillage helps protect carbon), combined with actions

that bring additional carbon to the soil, will allow for carbon sequestration over time. The

method of slash-and-burning resurfaces nitrogen to the surface which helps with nutritional

content. This only lasts three years and should be practiced in small increments to reduce spread

of rapid fire, and should never be a first option (Dunne, 2020). Although, when needed, this

method should only be used on low-producing soil, opposed to fresh, rich soil. Other practices

include “implementation of conservation tillage (no-till, zone-till, minimum-till, shallow mixing

or injection for manure applications), retaining crop residues, including cover crops in crop

rotations, adding organic nutrient sources such as manure and compost, and including perennial

crops in crop rotations, (Zurba, 2016). Their implementation may slow or even reverse the loss

of carbon from agricultural fields, improve nutrient cycling and reduce nutrient loss (Corning,

2016).

Agricultural practices result in current over emission of carbon dioxide with

foreshadowing of permanent soil and forestation damage; human adjustment to soil

7
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
preparation actions and decrease in livestock involvement leads to possible solutions to the

detrimental effects.

The practice of burning biomass and logging has created semi-permanent environmental

results such as excessive carbon dioxide emission, permanent burn damage leading to a depletion

of biodiversity and inhibition, as well as a decrease in natural preventatives of overemission

protection. The US Forest Service (2016) claims their “inventory estimates that privately owned

forestland stores 77.1 metric tonnes carbon per acre; public forestland stores 81.6 to 84.6 Mt/A,

with the National Forest storing the largest amount per acre.” Within the forest, as mentioned

previously, biomass (living or growing organisms) absorbs carbon dioxide throughout its life. In

the United States alone, there is 818,814,000 acres of forest. According to Emily Adams, 2012,

“Forests cover 31 percent of the world’s land surface, just over 4 billion hectares.” As times

progress that number changes and on average, the earth is losing 16 million acres per year.

Adams continues to lead that “in the first decade of this century, the rate of deforestation was

slightly lower, but still, a disturbingly high 13 million hectares were destroyed annually. As

forest expansion remained stable, the global net forest loss between 2000 and 2010 was 5.2

million hectares per year,” (Adams, 2012).

Annika Dean from the Climate Council, in 2019 discusses the influence of industries and

means of production. As mentioned, farmers use burning to “help” soil revive the nutrient rich

qualities of nitrogen replenishing by setting fire to nutrient deficient soil. This has opposite

effects as it easily transports to other masses when not controlled. This results in often forest

fires, costing of great consequence. Of the burned biomass, 90% is due to unintentional forest

fire while 10% is due to natural fires, (Nunnez, 2022). Even though fires themselves produce
8
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
carbon dioxide by burning mass, it is often not accounted for that the vegetation destroyed in the

process is holding in carbon dioxide as well.

The forest is a vegetation sink that collects the carbon dioxide of dead grassland,

shrubbery, fallen trees, and other biomasses collected from photosynthesis, almost acting as a

storage area, (Inglett, 2011). The four layers of vegetation are the emergent, canopy trees,

understory, and forest floor. As the years go on, the vegetation builds from the decay, building

that 77.1 hectares of carbon stored per acre, (Adams, 2012). As the global temperature rises, so

does the potential for forest fires. When farmers dry soil on fire, the wind can easily pick up the

flames, and spread it to forestland.

Due to the hot temperatures (from being practiced late summer) the challenge to put out

the fire has heightened. For example, Paul Nunnz, 2022, from National Geographic states that

“about 17 percent of the Amazonian rainforest has been destroyed over the past 50 years, and

losses recently have been on the rise.” The organization Amazon Conservation reports that

destruction rose by 21 percent in 2020, a loss the size of Israel.” This was due to continuous

wildfires after another, consistent to today. In the process of these fires, National Geographic

continues to explain, the effects aren’t detrimental to the environment unless the fire passes the

canopy layer. The canopy layer consists of dense trees that protect the forest from fires for a

period of time. Once the fire penetrates the layer the severity of biodiversity effects reaches a

semi-permanent detriment. The understory and forest floor consist of the most vegetation. When

the fire reaches these layers, the vegetation and surrounding biomass is destroyed. The Amazon

Rainforest, for example, is over 10 million years old, and the corruption of vegetation results in

the release of millions of years worth of stored carbon. The gas is released into the atmosphere

and contributes to the greenhouse effect. For the biodiversity of the environment, it has destroyed
9
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
the whole ecosystem. From Catherine Brahic of New Scientist (2008), “Certain aspects can

return surprisingly quickly – within 65 years. But for the landscape to truly regain its native

identity takes a lot longer – up to 4000 years.” The wildfires destroy the food source and homes

of biodiversity; plants, animals, trees, and other living organisms, threatening their survival.

For plants and trees that can survive the flames, they are susceptible to disease, fungus,

and insects due to their decreased resistance following burn injuries. (Inglett, 2011).

Unfortunately, there is no way to gain back the progress of the sink after it is burnt. Yet, practices

to help support regrowth from damage is viable. Ideals from Time Magazine explained that

“restoration for damaged ecosystems can be enacted by planting trees on land where forests have

been cut down or burned, parks are being established to protect rainforests and wildlife, and

support companies that operate in ways that minimize damage to the environment” are just a few

(Time, 2018). Although vegetation can be replanted and preserved for minimal restoration, if

these actions are not practiced soon after it was destroyed the sink could be gone forever.

The atmospheric effects of the loss of vegetation impacts the carbon dioxide concentration

and pollutant in the air; human regulation of practices and control is a needed solution to

the severe consequence.

A type of logging, “clear cutting” is most detrimental as it deforests the whole area

leaving no trees alive. According to the Sierra Club of California (2020), “Since 1997, over 1

million acres in California have been decimated by clearcutting and related logging practices.”

Clearcutting is an extreme logging method in which resilient natural forests are harvested and

replaced with man-made tree plantations that do not replicate the ecosystem services of a healthy

forest (Sierra Club, 2020). After logging, most clear cut sites are bulldozed and herbicide is

applied to strip away any remaining saplings, bushes, and other plants that may compete with the
10
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
conifer seedlings that start the man-made plantation. This living flora, which is treated as debris

and called “slash,” is always piled and sometimes burned. What remains is a moonscape that

disrupts the natural forest ecosystem (Vidal, 2017).

The most destructive form of even-aged logging is clear cutting because in other forms of

even-age management, loggers often drop or leave tree seeds/pine cones in hopes of restocking

the area cleared. In a different method, loggers will remove certain trees one day, the rest

following a later date. Although, through every variation of even-age logging, the timber

companies will eventually clear and remove all biomatter. Once again, leaving the soil exposed

to the sun to dry it out, making it inhabitable with minimal biodiversity. Remitation can take

place to rejuvenate the forest in a process called monoplanting (Rosenvald, 2008). This carries

issues with the procedure. Mono-planting, as it is called, only plants one type of tree so it only

helps repopulate the specific species rather than the environment and the biodiversity. Only

animals that can survive in that specific tree can live there (Bennett, 2017). Forests provide

human’s pure water, stable climate, wildlife habitat, and most importantly, clean air. These, in

turn, facilitate valuable ecosystem services that benefit people and the economy, including

carbon sequestration, timber production, crop pollination, soil fertility, tourism, and recreation

(Sierra Club, 2020). To ensure our communities and future generations receive these critical

benefits, we must manage our forests sustainably (McGill, 2021). Clear cutting has opposite

effects, and due to mono-planting, the use of only securing one type of tree creates a weak

ecosystem by having minimal diversity. Loggers removed the mature trees that would be able to

resist fire and slow the wind that spreads the flames to communities, leaving behind highly

flammable plantations due to the only vegetation being newly grown shrubbery. Thus, greatly

increasing the severity of wildfires. According to Sarah Fetch (2021), “Home-owners [in
11
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
California] are being asked to change where they build, use non-flammable building materials,

and maintain 100-feet of defensible space from forests.” Clear cutting releases more carbon

dioxide than any other form of logging, and areas that are clear cut will not sequester more

carbon dioxide than they release for two decades. The amount of stored carbon released into the

atmosphere from the older trees is vastly greater than the new seedlings' ability to intake and

remove from the system. To reverse climate change, one should reference the strategy of storing

more carbon dioxide than is released as a greenhouse gas.

Healthy forests are critical carbon storage centers that annually remove 33% of the

amount of greenhouse gas emitted from fossil fuel combustion. Moreover, a 2020 study from

National Geographic found that the “potential for forests to accumulate carbon has likely been

underestimated by 32% - meaning our forests are even more important for fighting the climate

crisis than they give them credit for.” If minimal action is proceeded, it is estimated that within

the next century, the rainforests as of now will be depleted and destroyed from climate change

unless acted upon now. Results of flash floods, poor water quality, increase in wildfires,

extinction of certain species, soil erosion, and a decrease in certain crops are a likely futuristic

possibility. Due to

deforestation and soil depletion from human neglect of possible effects such as futuristic

challenges of quality of life, changes in logging strategies and contained soil nutrient revival

are needed.

“A typical passenger vehicle emits about 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide per

year,”(EPA, 2021). Two cars would equate to the weight of about one full grown elephant. In the

United states alone, there are around 284 million active vehicles driving year-round (Carlier,
12
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
2022). A typical sedan-model car burns the fossil fuel petroleum, creating carbon dioxide (the

smoke seen and smelled exacerbated from the car). Fossil fuels are consumed to transport people

to places, resulting in 337 million gallons of gasoline burned daily. Even though independence in

transportation is a marvelous privilege, it is corrupting the atmosphere and depleting the air

quality. According to the UCS (2014), “Collectively, cars and trucks account for nearly one-fifth

of all US emissions, emitting around 24 pounds of carbon dioxide and other global-warming

gasses for every gallon of gas.” Cars are creating hazardous toxins as the combustion of fossil

fuels processes. Once emitted, the smoke enters the atmosphere and is trapped. The gas

continues to absorb the sun’s heat, but can not leave the atmosphere like regular gas. Carbon

dioxide absorbs energy at a variety of wavelengths between 2,000 and 15,000 nanometers — a

range that overlaps with that of infrared energy. As CO2 soaks up this infrared energy, it vibrates

and re-emits it back in all directions. About half of that energy goes out into space, and about

half of it returns to Earth as heat, contributing to the rise in global temperature of the greenhouse

effect (EPA, 2021). With that, these fossil fuels are a non-renewable resource and though

encouraged because transportation is convenient, as time goes on, the burning of fossil fuels is

going to naturally decrease due to a limited amount of supply provided by the earth.

However other methods of transportation and options for energy are being tested. The

Columbia Climate school (2021) presented viable solutions to the timer left on supply of fuel and

what the possible remedies to the future problem provide. Such as the use of Cleaner biofuels

(biodiesel; animal fats, vegetable oil) produce fewer emissions when they’re burned. Some

fuels—those made from cellulosic biofuels—reduce emissions by 80 percent compared to

gasoline. And better regulations would help prevent the gasoline we do use from getting any

dirtier. Another idea is the use of more Fuel-efficient vehicles. Examples include hybrid cars:
13
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
Honda: Accord, Civic, Insight, CR-Z, Fit, Toyota: Prius, Camry, Nissan: Altima, Lexus: LS 600h

L, GS 450h, HS 250h, CT200h, Mercedes: S400 BlueHybrid, Hyundai: Sonata, Ford: Fusion and

Infiniti: M35h. These vehicles use gasoline and a battery. Often, these cars will output almost

double a full gasoline car. Therefore, they use less gas to travel the same distance as their less

efficient counterparts. When we burn less fuel, we generate fewer emissions. When emissions go

down, the pace of global warming slows.

The most effective technologically advanced way of reducing carbon dioxide emissions is

through the use of 100% battery powered electric cars. Electric cars and trucks use electricity as

fuel, producing fewer emissions than their conventional counterparts. When the electricity comes

from renewable sources, all-electric vehicles produce zero emissions to drive. The company

Tesla has invented such a car, including auto-driving to reduce the risk of crashing, a fully

electric model with touch-screen technology, and absolutely no smoke, meaning zero carbon

footprint. (Mierlo,2007). Yet, while the vehicle does not require gas, according to Virginia

Mcconnell, an economist at the environmental research firm Resources for the Future (2018),

“It still might get its energy from burning carbon. It depends on how [one's] local grid generates

electricity. “If [one] use[s] coal-fired power plants to produce the electricity, then all-electrics

don’t even look that much better than a traditional vehicle in terms of greenhouse gasses.” While

portraying the face of eco-friendly driving, the environmental consequences occur when the

lifespan of the vehicle expires and it is taken to the junkyard. As the battery of the tesla sits, it

weighs around 900 pounds. In recent studies, it has been found that there is potential for toxic

chemicals to leak out of the battery that are very hazardous and toxic to the environment

(Eberhard, 2006). Even though advancements in technology are required, the electric vehicles
14
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
emit a substantial decrease if that to none compared to fully gasoline powered vehicles. Other

options in reducing the carbon footprint and saving fossil fuels is by riding the bus, riding a bike,

or even walking destinations.

The outcome of burning fossil fuels at rapid daily rates raises the detrimental effects from

global warming through increase of CO2 production resulting in climate change;

converting to electric cars and fewer emitting activities is needed to reduce the threat of

irreversible heat incline.

Global Warming is displaying potential severe future consequences and practices need to

start now. Yet, the matter being pushed to the side until one day too late. For decades, politicians

have made goals with other countries, encouraging humans to ride the bus, raising gas prices not

only due to inflation, but because there needs to be conservation of what's left of the fossil fuels,

and to regulate the people using them. Tesla came out with an electric car, but only 1,947,000

people have purchased it out of the 7.7 billion people on this earth, mostly due to price and

location. Even so, at the moment, people are comfortable, and will continue to drive their

gasoline cars, continue to use the slash-and-burn method on soil, and will continue to grow and

consume beef for profit. Greenhouse gasses will always be continuously emitting, but if only a

few thousand people are contributing to the revival of the amazon forest and the replanting of

trees when they are destroyed, only a small change will be made. Take a look at all the lives that

have been affected by forest fires in california, the houses burned to the ground, the massive

amount of the 10 million year old amazon rainforest gone from unruly wildfires from man. Now

is the time for humans to come together despite the differences to reduce greenhouse gas
15
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
emissions and store carbon through practice riding the bus, or carpooling, community service by

planting saplings, even simple tasks such as turning off the lights, and reducing oven usage, all to

better the planet and the futuristic way of living to avoid the severe detrimental effects on

environment and society.

References

Mikhaylov, A. (n.d.). The concept of infamy in roman law - researchgate. Retrieved May 6,

2022, from

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alexey-Mikhaylov/publication/342372335_Global_

climate_change_and_greenhouse_effect/links/5f576af2299bf13a31ab136c/Global-climat

e-change-and-greenhouse-effect.pdf

Hopwood, N., & Cohen, J. (2008, December 29). Greenhouse Gases and Society.

Retrieved

May 6, 2022, from

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?rep=rep1&type=pdf&doi=10.1.1.183.566

2
16
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
Schneider, S. H. (1989). The Greenhouse Effect: Science and Policy. Science, 243(4892),

771–781.

Retrieved From

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.243.4892.771

Friel, S., Dangour, A. D., Garnett, T., Lock, K., Chalabi, Z., Roberts, I., Butler, A., Butler, C. D.,

Waage, J.,

McMichael, A. J., & Haines, A. (2009). Public health benefits of strategies to reduce

greenhouse-gas emissions: food and agriculture. The Lancet, 374(9706), 2016–2025.

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(09)61753-0

Morgadinho, L., Oliveira, C., & Martinho, A. (2015). A qualitative study about perceptions of

European

automotive sector’s contribution to lower greenhouse gas emissions. Journal of Cleaner

Production, 106, 644–653. Retrieved from

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.096

Schwarze, R., Niles, J. O., & Olander, J. (2002). Understanding and managing leakage in

forest–based

greenhouse–gas–mitigation projects. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of

London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 360(1797),

1685–1703. Received from https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2002.1040

Fearnside, P. M. (1995). Hydroelectric Dams in the Brazilian Amazon as Sources of

“Greenhouse” Gases.

Environmental Conservation, 22(01), 7. Retrieved from

https://doi.org/10.1017/s0376892900034020
17
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
Bowman, J. (1990). The greenhouse effect. Land Use Policy, 7(2), 101–108. Retrieved from

https://doi.org/10.1016/0264-8377(90)90002-

‌ lalertruksa, T., Gheewala, S. H., & Sagisaka, M. (2009). Impacts of Thai bio-ethanol policy
S
target on land

use and greenhouse gas emissions. Applied Energy, 86, S170–S177. Retrieved from

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.05.010

Li, C. (2007). Quantifying greenhouse gas emissions from soils: Scientific basis and modeling

approach.

Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 53(4), 344–352. Retrieved from

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-0765.2007.00133.x

Johnson, J. M.-F., Franzluebbers, A. J., Weyers, S. L., & Reicosky, D. C. (2007, August 17).

Agricultural

opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Environmental Pollution. Retrieved

May 26, 2022, from

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0269749107003016

O'Connell, R. E., Bord, R. J., & Wiefek, N. (n.d.). Who wants to reduce greenhouse gas

emissions? - wiley online library. Retrieved May 26, 2022, from

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1540-6237.00067

Cline, W. R. (2008). Global Warming and Agriculture. Finance & Development,

0045(001). Retrieved June 13, https://doi.org/10.5089/9781451922349.022.A007

‌Johnson, K. A., & Johnson, D. E. (1995). Methane emissions from cattle. Journal of
18
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
Animal Science, 73(8), 2483–2492. Retrieved june 13th,

https://doi.org/10.2527/1995.7382483x

Okshevsky, M. (2020, March 15). Cows, Methane, and Climate Change. Let’s Talk

Science. Retrieved June 13th,

https://letstalkscience.ca/educational-resources/stem-in-context/cows-methane-and-climat

e-change

Quinton, A. (2019, June 27). Cows and Climate Change. UC Davis; UC Davis. Retrieved

June 13, https://www.ucdavis.edu/food/news/making-cattle-more-sustainable

Oertel, C., Matschullat, J., Zurba, K., Zimmermann, F., & Erasmi, S. (2016).

Greenhouse gas emissions from soils—A review. Geochemistry, 76(3),

327–352. Retrieved June 13,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemer.2016.04.002

Restoring soils could remove up to “5.5bn tonnes” of greenhouse gasses every year.

=(2020, March 16). Carbon Brief. Retrieved June 13,

https://www.carbonbrief.org/restoring-soils-could-remove-up-to-5-5bn-tonnes-of-greenho

use-gases-every-year/

Could Global CO2 Levels be Reduced by Planting Trees? (2018, October 29). CO2

Meter. Retrieved June 13,

https://www.co2meter.com/blogs/news/could-global-co2-levels-be-reduced-by-planting-tr

ees

Dean, A. (2019, August 21). Deforestation and Climate Change. Climate Council.

Retrieved June 13,

19
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans
https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/deforestation/#:~:text=When%20forests

20are%20cleared%20or

Eco-Economy Indicators - Forest Cover | EPI. (n.d.). Www.earth-Policy.org. Retrieved

June 13

http://www.earth-policy.org/?/indicators/C56/

National Geographic. (2022). Nationalgeographic.org. Retrieved June 13

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/?q=&page

Nunez, C. (2019, February 7). Deforestation and Its Effect on the Planet. Environment.

Retrieved June 13,

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/deforestation#:~:text=About%2

017%20percent%20of%20the

The Amazon Rain Forest Is Nearly Gone. We Went to the Front Lines to See If It Could

Be Saved. (n.d.). Time. Retrieved June 13,

https://time.com/amazon-rainforest-disappearing/#:~:text=The%20Amazon%20is%2010

%20million

About Clearcutting. (2021, November 29). Sierra Club. Retrieved June 13,

https://www.sierraclub.org/grassroots-network/stop-clearcutting-ca/about-cle

arcutting

‌D’Almeida, C., Vörösmarty, C. J., Hurtt, G. C., Marengo, J. A., Dingman, S. L., & Keim, B.

D. (2007). The effects of deforestation on the hydrological cycle in Amazonia: a

review on scale and resolution. International Journal of Climatology, 27(5), 633–647.

Retrieved June 13, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1475

20
Global Warming: The Biggest Threat Towards Humans