I am confused, as carbon dioxide is a major cause of global warming and is 60 percent heavier than oxygen and so won’t be absorbed into the atmosphere. Forest burning is the major source of carbon dioxide. Why are they doing prescribed burns other than money for Forest Service employees?
The only good for carbon dioxide that I am aware of in regard to nature is that trees and plants require carbon dioxide, water and soil to grow, and then they give off oxygen. Now for the sake of comparison, let’s say it takes 100,000 units of carbon dioxide to grow 100,000 of acres of forest. That 100,000 acres of forest burns, the U.S.F.S. generates another 200,000 units of carbon dioxide, while they herd it around and watch it burn, from suppression and smoke from the fire, before rain puts it out. This puts 300,000 units of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, which leads to global warming, because there is no forest left to absorb it; however, it does provide food for small trees and brush to start growing. Then the Forest Service will have a controlled burn to keep the forest from getting overgrown, which they will get paid to do this burning. Otherwise, they get paid to destroy the very thing that will take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, just like they did to watch the 100,000 acres burn.
Yes, our forest is being managed strictly for the Forest Service budget money because they refuse to log the whole burn, but maybe a token amount. To log the whole burn might help the general economy, and heaven forbid this.
They don’t care about the people who are on oxygen or people with allergies; strictly money.