/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10380021
of course it should be
next question

>>10380021
no water.

>>10380040
Desalination + irrigation

>>10380055
Desalination is massively energy expensive therefore negating the point of the forest it supports. Also soil fertility is a problem. Can't grow much in sand even with sufficient water.

>get angry that coral reefs, rain forests, and jungles being destroyed
>yeah guys lets completely destroy this ecosystem for some reason its worth less than the others

No, i want a gladiator ring for all the pedafiles in our back yard. Put it pay per view and the money go's twoards there water and rice till there slaughted.

>>10380062
>therefore negating the point of the forest it supports.
Just use nuclear.

In any case there is that image of those giant canals on the Australian map I always see on pol.

>>10380079
This

>>10380021
I hate to point out the obvious. But a rain forest needs rain.

>>10380021
Aussie here. Answer is no, not all of it. Portions of the Lake Eyre basin and Nullarbor plain areas should be reforested to help alleviate drought issues, but the bulk of the desert should be left as is for reasons both ecological and geopolitical.

>>10380458
obvious problem is obvious

>>10380021
Good luck. It's sand and rocks thousands of kilometres from the ocean.

I'm Australian and would like to some day build a large commune in the remote Bush. I'm talking about a large underground construct with a solid fortification on top, vegetables gardens and salmon ponds, laboratories and research facilities, etc...

What would it take to develop a self-sustainable community? I assume you need some water source, I assume you will need to replace the soil... I dont know how any of this works but it's a life goal for me. I assume I'll need surveyors to come out and determine suitability of the ground to ensure it's safe to build underground and all that.

>>10380579
Make a house out of shipping containers then bury them.

>>10380576
>>10380021
Ever heard of the Bradfield Scheme, m8s? I'm guessing not.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradfield_Scheme

>>10380592
I want it to be a technological marvel. I'm talking about massive condensers to collect water from even low humidity environments that provides enough water to run the facility.

There has to be a way.

>>10380021
>to combat climate change

We are IN an unusually long mild inter-glacial period of an ice age. What is "normal" climate, is huge glaciers covering vast areas of the earth.

>>10380579
>I'm Australian and would like to some day build a large commune in the remote Bush. I'm talking about a large underground construct with a solid fortification on top, vegetables gardens and salmon ponds, laboratories and research facilities, etc...
That's totally plausible.

>I assume you need some water source
A well.

>I assume you will need to replace the soil
Hydroponics.

>I assume I'll need surveyors to come out and determine suitability of the ground to ensure it's safe to build underground and all that.
There's already tones of shit built underground in central Australia. A good proportion of White Cliffs is underground.

>>10380655
>What is "normal" climate, is huge glaciers covering vast areas of the earth.
The Holocene isn't abnormal, as far as human civilization is concerned.

>>10380040
Put wind turbines in reverse so they would blow humid ocean air inside the continent

>>10380665
>The Holocene isn't abnormal, as far as human civilization is concerned.

We were born on a very mild week in the middle of winter and we assume this is normal weather.

The glaciers WILL return unless we start doing what we can to heat the planet up... ohhh, we ARE doing that right now, accidentally.

>>10380675
>We were born on a very mild week in the middle of winter and we assume this is normal weather.
That depends on what timescale you're looking at.

>The glaciers WILL return
Not for many thousands of years.

>unless we start doing what we can to heat the planet up... ohhh, we ARE doing that right now, accidentally.
Burn your house in autumn to escape the cold of winter.

>>10380665
How sustainable are natural wells? Will they eventually run out?
Is it feasible to build fish farms in an arid environment? Would they have to be underground?
Could a a well sustain the amount if water required for this endeavor?
Aquaponics seems like a decent idea to combine the desire to grow fish and vegetables but it would most likely require a complete aquatic system that has many types of water animals so that larger fish could feed without having to import masses of fish food. Can an environment that nurtures all this life even be created in an arid environment and be self-sustainable?


What are the main problems here?

Also, what is a good idea for housing above and below ground?

>>10380840
>How sustainable are natural wells? Will they eventually run out?
Depends on how rapidly you draw water.

>Could a a well sustain the amount if water required for this endeavor?
Probably, if you recycle it and are careful to avoid waste.

>Is it feasible to build fish farms in an arid environment? Would they have to be underground?
Evaporation is probably the largest concern - building them underground might work. Why fish farms though?

>What are the main problems here?
Transport and logistics.
Spare parts to fix things as they break.
Medical needs and evacuation.
Managing employees.
Basically the same type of issues as mines have.

>Also, what is a good idea for housing above and below ground?
For above ground: Either highly insulated and air-conditioned structures, or heavy concrete buildings with plenty of ventilation. I don't know what works well underground, but apparently the temperature is surprisingly stable and pleasant.

>>10380091
>Just use nuclear
>t. I dont actually know how nuclear works

>>10380091
>i always see on pol
Go back

>>10380540
>geopolitical
There's less than a million people living in this huge land mass. How would transforming it cause negativity?

>>10382506
The large desert areas as they are with most of the inhabited places worth talking about being towards the south helps discourage land invasion. Kinda like the Russian winter. If you make all that area easily inhabitable then China and perhaps Indonesia will start eyeing it, both countries with far far bigger populations than Australia.

>>10380094
>>10380079
The outback barely even qualifies as an ecosystem you fucking retard.

>>10382795
This. Nothing but spiders and boongs out there

>>10382774
Chinese businessmen are already investing heavily in Australian real estate all while going balls deep inside the hottest white Aussie women.

>>10382795
There's a significant amount of plant and animal life out there.

>>10380021
No. That's where we keep our cows.

>>10383053
If you green it you can put the cows in much smaller spaces. Australian cattle stations are huge because the land is so inefficient.

>>10383053
>Cows
Quadrupedal skeletons.

The real problem isn't water, it's nutrient depletion. Much of the soil in Australia has been dead for hundreds of thousands of years. Add water and you still can't grow much. Contrast that with the Sahara which is rich with nutrients and just needs water to get going again. What Australia needs is a bunch of volcanic eruptions to coat the land with ash that would replenish the soil.

Realistically, how would one create a society for the pursuit of objectivism in the Harsh Australian Desert?

>>10383073
>If you green it you can put the cows in much smaller spaces
Good idea. We'll be able to fit in heaps more cows if we green it.

This is somewhat related, and /sc/ was the best place to ask:
We always hear about "don't cut down the rain forest". This got me thinking. What about the east coast of the US?
Since the 1800 there have to be less than like 50% of the forest on the east coast left.
Doesn't this also have an impact on the climate?
Lots of people that pollute, but no trees to fix the pollution?

>>10383103
Yes.

>>10383103
Yes. This is why it should be our utmost priority to ensure racial and transgender equity and increase immigration.

>>10380079
Is outback ecosystem?

Is man made climate change real bros? Its so politicized/exploited by govts, all the models they seem to shill are innaccurate, yet it seems to be the mainstream scientific consensus and anyone denying is surely a tinfoil conspiracy hick. Do we know for sure man is causing it? If so, how much?

>>10383232
>Is man made climate change real bros?
Yes.

>Its so politicized/exploited by govts
Ignore what politicians and journalists have to say. Actual scientists overwhelmingly believe that AGW is real and serious.

>all the models they seem to shill are innaccurate
They actually do pretty well. See pic.

>anyone denying is surely a tinfoil conspiracy hick
It's the other way around. There are a (very) small number of actual climatologists who disagree, and they're treated fine. But conspiracy theorists and PR groups are incredibly fond of AGW denial, and so the make up the vast majority of "skeptics". And because they're rarely interested in arguing in good faith, people who repeat their regularly-debunked claims tend to get shouted at.

>Do we know for sure man is causing it? If so, how much?
IIRC, 80-130% of the observed warming is due to human activity.

>>10383250
Ok thanks. I just remember Al Gore in 2006 saying Florida would be under water by now and all these other bullshitters like Occasio Cortez. The political stuff and alarmism really turns me off and makes me want to deny it even though I havent personally looked into it much.

If anyone from the skeptical side has a case to make, please do so.

>>10383266
Rising sea levels doesn't mean Florida will suddenly go underwater. It means occurrences of tidal flooding will get more and more frequent, which a cursory search appears to indicate is indeed the case.

>>10383279
>Al Gore proceeds to buy house on Florida coast
Fuck that fag

This has really got me thinking now.

Atmosphere water generators would be horribly inefficient in the outback because... obviously theres no water so humidity is down. Most other solutions are too small scale.

The only solution would be to create artificial rivers from the ocean right?

Most of it will be underwater after the cataclysmic pole shift and polar melt.

>>10380021
Should, but how?

>>10383487
For fucks sake, see >>10380599
Either reopen a path from Port Augusta to Lake Eyre, or create a dam system to redirect rivers from north Qld into the intermittent river systems that feed into Lake Eyre, or preferably both. People have been thinking about this sort of thing since WWII.

>>10380021
How?

>just pour ocean water inland
You'd be fucking up ocean currents and hence disturbing thousands of ecosystems globally. You'd also be destroying farmland that grows lots of Australian exports and food. Wells won't work either to support a rainforest. Rainforests are soaking wet and are constantly exposed to precipitation and humidity. Wells just can't support that.

>just build giant fans to redirect humid air inland
Powered by what? Solar? You'd need a massive amount of energy to even push the moist air a noticeable amount. Have you ever stood a few meters away from a fan? You don't feel any wind anymore. Are you seriously suggesting a massive relay of huge fans across Australia or something--even more so disrupting the environment?

>what about soils? Outback soils have no nutrients capable of sustaining a rainforest
>hydroponics, bro
So the rainforest will be manually sustained? A fucking rainforest? Your plan is to create a giant artificial ecosystem instead of one that is actually integrated into the environment and can support itself? No way. It would be easier to just create a bacteria or plant that is super efficient in photosynthesis and regulate their distribution in order to combat global warming.

It's impossible to safely create any kind of rich ecosystem in the Australian outback. You can't grow anything out there beyond dry shrubs and grasses and hardy insects and reptiles. Even if you could get enough water flowing, you'd still need fertile soils. It would be your best option to implement fertile soils along the water source then plant vegetation so it then grows outwards over the many years, but even then it wouldn't be close to a rainforest.

>>10380021
Yes

>>10382795
Deserts are fucking full of life.

>>10380040
umm excuse me hunny
>what is the great artesian basin

>>10382795
go back to 7th grade biology and kill yourself

>>10382987
>>10383608
>deserts have just as much biomass and ecological diversity as a rainforest
/sci/: greatest minds on 4chan

>>10383608
hahahaha

>>10383608

>>10383500
Is this if literally everything melts?

>>10380062
Not if Nuclear is the source of energy. But apparently Australian Greens are a special kind of retarded as they are obsessed with whether or not the useless wasteland that makes up the majority of Australia will be desecrated by the "evil" white man. Also the constant babying of petrol sniffing abo's is another hindrance to any real progress at improving the habitability of Australia's interior.

>>10380021
Anon you can't just magically make a rain forest in the middle of a desert without going through a lot of baby steps.
Read the Dune books by frank herbert, the ecology and geo-forming of a desert world into a verdant paradise is a background plot for the first 4 books and will put your head in the right space.
Basically you get there by slowly introducing hearty grasses that can help slow down the evaporation of water from your soil, which means it has a better chance to make it to the water table. Once you establish your grasslands, it's time to introduce bushes, shrubs, and scrub trees to help magnify the effect. You slowly include more and more species as the land begins to become able to support it.
You're also going to want to periodically burn all of this, just to help fertilize and reclaim topsoil.
If you want an honest-to-god rainforest, your best effect is to build an artificial mountain inland from the coast. As warm moist air is forced to rise, it cools, and the water precipitates out of it, it's this effect that makes the western part of washington state, especially around puget sound, is a big temperate rainforest.
You've got to give to get, and since you lose most of your moisture on the windward side, you cast what is called a rain shadow on the leeward side. Again, look at washington state, on the other side of the Cascades, it's a pretty arid area.

>>10385422
The Greens have also managed to completely and utterly fuck up the emissions trading scheme issue, allegedly one of their primary goals. They aren't the brightest bunch indeed.

>>10381100
at this point in time nuclear is the only viable cheap green energy source we have

nothing else even comes close to it

they could buy one or two high powered nuclear stations/reactors for a fraction of a cost just for desalination and irrigation, its getting water to the desert that is a bigger problem than the energy

>>10383540
>t. never had a decent fan
They already got a shitton of wind turbines, mostly in coastal areas as well, you just need to rewire half of them to make wind instead of holding it back, and then have the rest on the other side of Australia to recover the energy spent

>>10383250
>1980-1999
Try again buddy

>>10380040
huge amount of water during the crazy wet season gigalitres of water just flows into the ocean

if said water could be harvested

>>10382978
>Going balls deep
So about 1/2 an inch then

>>10385398
It's a map from a website that purports to be conveying information communicated to them by aliens. Pretty serious stuff

>>10386433
And what of the coastal lands which rely upon that precipitated air to bring rain to already water starved established farming regions?

>>10385398
Had this one saved on account of how often the below sea level Australia myth gets posted.

>>10386698
Would be simple. Hell even the Roman empire used aquaducts.

>>10380021
Isn't that mars

>>10386613
What? That's the model hindcast.

>>10380021
yes

>>10380062
no one is going to spend 10billion dollars and 10 years of building nuke site to plant some trees.
Dont get me wrong i wish they would, but man kind hasnt really showing a propensity for long term projects that require alot of capital.
It be cheap, build a large artifical lake and pump in millions up millions of gallons of water. the lake of course would be mostly underground

>>10383540
Drill through the crust until you hit magma. Do this over and over again until the outback is covered in lava. This will replenish the soil. Water obviously will still be a problem.

>>10386698
F

>>10383500
Bring on the Water World.

>>10380021
The soil is ancient and some of the least nutrient rich on earth.

>>10380021
Why not just fill it with water to combat rising sea levels instead

>>10383608
>>10380079
Out back is near lifeless same with Sahara curtin lifeforms and biomed are more important then other fuck the polarbears

>>10380040
Ocean irrigation of dry arid lands to increase H2O evap.

>>10383608
There were plants and birds and rocks and things.

what about groundwater?
how deep would you need to drill?

>>10389296
The groundwater would last for decades then be gone forever.

>>10389276
>Out back is near lifeless same with Sahara
Most of the Australian outback looks nothing like the Sahara.

>>10389296
i see everyone is forgetting about mangroves
build a long canal that dump into lake
put mangroves around in another it. the mangoes should help to filter some of the water.
when fish goto the swamp they will help put nitrogen into the soil

>>10380062
SOLAR DESALINATION
SOLAR DESALINATION
SOLAR DESALINATION

Oh look now you have a free fusion power plant that will last billions of years.

>>10389345
Never claimed it did just it was near lifeless

>>10380091
>Just use nuclear.
Are you trolling or do you honestly not understand how stupid this suggestion is?

>>10380840
Fish farms are stupid. They waste tonnes of life energy

>>10380579
The main challenge will be to find people to join your community who are useful and not shitheads.

How many decaying human bodies would be needed to replenish the soil? Asking for a genocidal friend who sees an opportunity with boat people.

>He unironically fell for the climate change meme
EVERY BODY RUN, WE'RE LITERALLY ABOUT TO DIE, THE OCEANS WILL SUBMERGE NEW YORK CITY. IT'S NOT TOO LATE TO DONATE MONEY TO STOP THIS

>>10383078
Let's kick start this by nuking the outback

>>10380021
just think if we cant "terraform this" then MARS is complete pipe dream

>>10390024
thought of that, you dont even need a tonne of electricity just enough to drip feed a couple hectrares of trees as a time

>>10391189
I'd donate to submerge New York City and Los Angeles.

>>10391232
Coincidentally, most climate change shills would die if these two cities got suddenly submerged

>>10391247
>Coincidentally, most people who are right would die if they were right

I'd rather we just make sure the reef doesn't get fucked up more than it is and stop over logging in Tasmania.

>>10391296
We should convert the nullarbor into a massive forest and tree farm. Would solve the logging issue in Tas, help protect against drought for SA/NSW, help connect WA and SA better, and give a massive middle finger to nature.

>>10390024
Should work nicely in Australia with a huge desert outback and political stability (unlike Sahara). In addition to freshwater and obscene amounts of electricity you would also get mountains of salt and can refine purified materials from sea water from gypsum to uranium.

>>10382506
There'd be more space for foreigners and Australia is full.

>>10380021
Your biggest problem is salinity, it's a slow process reversing this problem.

>>10392146
Australia is the size of the continental US with less people than California.

>>10380021
Ecological collapse that will eventually kill off most life one the planet has already started, it's too late

>>10380021
Wouldn't do that mush to help, forests are carbon neutral, not negative and as shit gets hotter and plants start dying off they'll only be a source of CO2

>>10382987
>>10383608
I think that the point they're trying to make is that the ammount of animal and plant life that can be found in 1 sq km of dessert can be found in 1 sq dm of rainforest,.
And that the land therefore would be in much better use if it would be converted into a rainforest.

You shouldn't of course convert all of the australian outback to rainforest since the biodiversity that exists there is wort saving, but to say that it needs all of that area is just retarded, and that some of that area can't be used to do somehting better

>>10380021
boys this thread has been up since Monday what the fuck

>>10394032
>forests don't help
>dying forests hurt
wot?

>>10391189
woops

>>10383078
FiNALLY, A BRAIN.

Australian here, the big problem is the only thing Australias soil holds in any capacity is salt.
The more you wet it the more salt rises to the surface from subterranean layers.
Goos salt soil cancer in places like Western Australia or Wagga Wagga where heavy cropping has happens for so long that the soil levels are so acidic they can burn bare skin.
Wagga Wagga has so much a problem, with this it has moved into residential areas and eats cement on buildings.

However there is a cure for these insane levels of underground salt, native grasses like Lomandra over decades and centuries actually remove the salt content from the soil and add organic matter back in.
Because Inland Australia used to be a sea the salt levels are very very high and still lakes or depleted rivers absorb a lot of this in ground salt and become highly acidic, floating dead birds are a giveaway, aquatic life passes away far earlier.
The biggest irony is we are sitting on the largest fresh water artesian basin in the world which is so deep its under the salt layers and is fed continuously with fresh water for millions of years by Papua new guinea of all places, it travels under the Torres straight.

So yeah it is fixable but it will take centuries realistically and it would cost trillions.
I remember reading once a stupid idea to put a massive sail in syncronized orbit over the outback to cool it.

>>10383540
Grasses are the key, the only thing you could transform it into is Savannah, why bother?

>>10383608
Ignore the idiots replying, Australian deserts have the second highest amount of biodiversity per sqm meter on the continent. Only the Great barrier reef is higher, people forget about things like insects and flora.

>>10388522
Lets just poison the planets atmosphere so aboland can have fresh tomatos.

>>10390000
Mangroves will bring saltwater crocs to parts of the country they aren't now.

>>10389296
as little as 100 meters to 3 kms.

>>10380021
Another auscunt here.

If you greened the center of Australia, it would raise the oxygen levels globally.
If the oxygen levels of the surface atmosphere were to rise by 2%, due to the way spiders lungs work they could grow to the size of small dogs.
I don;t want to preak up a fight between my pitbull and a angry hairy 2 foot tall funnel web spider.
Kindly fuck off with your stupid ideas.
Thank you.

>>10395970
Fuck forests.
More oxygen is made by plankton globally, as such we should be chopping down all the trees to make bows and arrows and harpoons to kill the whales with. Fuck off

>>10396093
trees prevent topsoil erosion

oxygen isn't the only important thing, dumb nigger

>>10395970
Forests don't only have living trees in them. As trees die, they give off CO2. When shit gets hotter, the rate of new trees replacing old trees will fall, and all the CO2 stored in the forest will be released back into the atmosphere

>>10380021

>>10396165
It's easy to store the carbon from a dead tree though.

>>10380021
yes, it should be for many reasons. will it be? probably not

>>10396334

>>10396357
Australians come and discuss

>>10396380

>>10380091
Do you have any idea about the RIDICULOUS amounts of energy needed to just desalinate the water that you need?

"Let's use all the available fissionable material, including Thorium!"

>>10380579
HVAC technician here who is getting degree in EE. I'm down

>>10396357
How do you plan to stop them from decomposing?

Australia is like the Summer Antartica

>>10396720
Sinking logs for preservation is an old method. Their decay is extremely slow. Some governments like Japan have timber sinking into the ocean as part of their long term plan for when times are lean.

>>10396357
what does this accomplish?

do it cunt

>>10380021
Wow that place looks like shit they should pour gas on it and torch the ground

>>10396357
>Coming up next - mariana trench explodes in a massive fire after a passenger from a passing-by ship dropped a lit cigarette in the water

>>10394468
You fucking retarded engineers. There's no such thing as "doing something better". The biodiversity of the rainforest isn't inherently better than the biodiversity of the desert. It's all equally important.

And why the fuck would you convert the desert to rainforest when Australia's existing rainforest is being quartered up and levelled to make room for sugar cane and retiring boomers? Why don't you try saving that first? Dumbass.

>>10396357
Soooo basically you want to put the coal back in the ground?

>>10396320
Thanks, this is what I was talking about here:

>>10380091
>giant canals on the Australian map I always see on pol.

>>10396439
Australia has a huge desert that can be used for solar power genration for desalination.

>>10396039
based & redpilled

>>10380666
This
Any other answer is retarded

>>10380666
Australia is as big as the continental US. Fans won't touch the center.

You need to blast the soil with nitrogen first.

>>10397033
That's the sahara.

Seal the Drake Passage to disrupt the antarctic circumpolar current, allowing waters off the west coast of australia to warm enough to evaporate and rain on mainland oz.

>>10380021
No. If you're worried about reducing climate change or whatever, better off reforesting areas that actually had forests in the recent past. Majority of the energy needed is based around human labor, as opposed to all the irrigation problems with turning arid wastelands green.

>>10406122
>better off reforesting areas that actually had forests in the recent past
They mostly lost the forest due to people using the land now. No one uses the outback.

>>10396320
Wouldn't one be enough?

>>10406093
>risk fucking up the ecology
Too much.

>>10396039
>Ignore the idiots replying, Australian deserts have the second highest amount of biodiversity per sqm meter on the continent. Only the Great barrier reef is higher, people forget about things like insects and flora.

is that to due with no natural predators?

>>10383266
Made my skepctical argument here:
>>10410236
Would love to have a few eyes on it and hear some thoughts.

>>10380021
no that would massively increase WAS.

>>10393540
Exactly, very full. Unless you're suggesting your overpopulated shithole is a good, desirable thing?

>>10383078
The solution is drip irrigation to supply water to what little vegetation already exists, then use large herds of closely packed browsing livestock to accelerate soil formation through the production of droppings and nitrogen rich urine in a positive feedback loop.

You can also ignore irrigation and just go straight for large herds of animals but in that case you need to range them over a much larger area to avoid putting too much pressure on the plants in any given spot. You also need to keep the herd closely packed and moving otherwise they won't be dropping urine and feces densely enough and they will also spend too much time in a given area and will strip it completely bare.

This method of reformation of fertile land from what was once undergoing rapid desertification is proven to work in Africa, Asia, North America and South America using a wide variety of animals and of course in a wide variety of terrain and soil types. It's even been used to turn abandoned open pit mines and quarries into fertile valleys, requiring only a small supply of feed to start with and the nutrients put into the soil by the animals causes new seeds to rapidly sprout and make the process self sustaining.

Using drip irrigation in very dry areas with no water holes for animal to drink from is needed until the cycle of browsing, dropping and urinating, and regrowth can take off, which doesn't take more than a year or so. In fact you can replace drip irrigation with artificial water holes and just rely on animal urine to distribute the required moisture instead. Animals will tend to urinate next to or directly on top of the plants they're feeding from, and won't eat plants that have been pissed or shit on, so if you keep them in large herds they will constantly be moving on from piss-soaked land towards fresh food without eating everything.

>>10385506
>You're also going to want to periodically burn all of this, just to help fertilize and reclaim topsoil.
Burning it is the worst option. A vastly better idea is to use densely packed herds of livestock to clear out long grasses and shrubs by eating them, trampling them, and pissing and shitting everywhere, as that puts water, nutrients, and carbon in the form of decaying plant matter directly down on top of the soil. This allows humus to build up which acts like a water and nutrient sponge and which supports a huge variety of small organisms that speed up decomposition of organic matter like fallen leaves and wood and even dead animals back into soil nutrients for new plants to take advantage of.

To start of with all you need are a source of water accessible to animals, a herd of animals that you can shepherd into a dense group, and enough food for these animals that they won't starve before the first plants can take root. Taking a valley with a lake or stream at the bottom and literally no plant life as an example, you'd start off by moving your herd up and down the valley and giving them a bale of mixed hay once a day. The animals will eat half the bale but inevitably trample and shit on the other half, forcing them to move on to the next bale a hundred meters away. During the whole process they will also be moved down to the water and allowed to drink, thus transporting moisture from the bottom of the valley up to the dry fields and slopes. The plant seeds from the trampled hay find themselves buried in dirt and droppings soaked with piss and mixed with the rest of the hay, and they sprout quickly, forming a dense mat of grasses and other plants over the next couple weeks. By that time you have made it all the way around the valley with your herd and your animals eat roughly half of the plant matter in that spot once again. However the same trampling and shitting reoccurs so the herd moves on the next day without eating the grass down to nothing.

>>10396357
Probably unironically our best bet for total CO2 sequestration, given a few modifications. Would probably cause pretty significant soil micro-nutrient depletion though, something we'd have to deal with.

>>10413707
(cont)
So you keep moving your herd around and around this circuit, and every time they stop at one of the feeding spots they add more nutrients and more water, and over the next two weeks the grass grows more and expands to cover more ground. Even the areas between the initial feeding spots start to grow grasses as the herd continues to shit out seeds and piss on the ground as they move from place to place. In order to prevent overgrazing at this point your herd needs to be constantly moving, otherwise they will start to settle in one area and eat everything before moving on. The best way to do this is actually, paradoxically, to add more animals. A larger herd feels proportionally stronger pressure to keep moving as there is even more shit and piss being produced and dropped on the ground.

Once the entire area of land surrounding the water has been 'greened' with grasses and small plants, plus a significant amount of decaying plant matter has built up in the soil, it makes sense to start planting shrubs and trees close to the water, and to keep your animals grazing near the outer edges of the more fertile land in order to keep it expanding. Any means of slowing down the water flow, by planting reeds and willows and so forth would encourage moisture to build up rather than simply flow out of the system. Given enough time one could transform a barren desert valley with a small stream at the bottom into a fertile oasis with a huge amount of moisture stored in the soil and large amounts of plant and animal biomass. Having thick and spongy soil is vital for any ecosystem that isn't already a rainforest because it acts as a watershed during drought and dry season.

>>10404437
blast it with animal piss

why destroy a unique ecosystem?

>>10413737
Where do you learn all of this?

Yes. We should annihilate the outback ecosystem.

>>10416117
It's all dead, anon.

This whole thread and everyone in it is retarded. Trees are carbon neutral throughout their lifetime. They store carbon in their biomass and they release it when they die. More trees is not a valid solution to carbon emmisions

>>10383608
>australian "flora" and "fauna"
How many of those won't actively go out of their way to try and kill you given the chance?

>>10418379
We can store it for hundreds of years. In 2300 I'm pretty sure we'll have permanent technical fixes. This is to keep things from being fucked up now.

>>10380079
Deserts are shit though making Emustan a forested place like NA would make it objectively better.

>australia spends billions of dollars making millions of acres nice
>china steps in and buys all of it

>>10380062
Whatvif they made a massive irrigation canal from ocean to midland. With time a natural desalinization woukd occur along with cloud formation and rain and the canal would become a river fertilizing everuthing around it creating new ecosystems and forms of life im sure.