Assuming all these trees were harvested, the area would lose 59 percent of its carbon but still be classified as forest. They estimate the forest contains 121.2 metric tons of carbon per hectare, of which 71.4 tons is locked up in trees attractive to loggers. To illustrate this case, Sasaki and Putz looked at inventory data for forest in central Cambodia. Green groups fear that this limitation could allow forestry companies to collect carbon payments while continuing to inflict heavy damage in forest areas. The definition means that an old-growth rainforest can be heavily logged, with substantial amounts of timber (biomass) removed, without recognition of the loss of carbon. The UNFCCC defines “forest” as an area of 0.05-1 hectares in size with 10 to 30 percent covered by canopy consisting of trees that reach a height of at least 2-5 meters at maturity. Forest degradation is thought to have resulted in similar emissions. Over the past decade global tropical deforestation was estimated to result in 1.1–2.2 billion tons year. The result: an international climate framework could ignore substantial emissions from forest degradation, a process that reduces forest carbon stock and other ecosystem services, increases the risk of fire, and diminishes biodiversity. Putz note that current definitions fail to effectively account for degradation of forests, including industrial logging and conversion of natural forests to some types of plantations. Lending academic weight to concerns that environmentalists have long voiced, Nophea Sasaki and Francis E.

Specifically, weaken may imply loss of physical strength, health, soundness, or stability or of quality, intensity, or effective power.The weak definition of what constitutes forest under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) puts the effectiveness of a proposed mechanism for reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) at risk, argue researchers writing in the journal Conservation Letters. The words weaken and undermine are synonyms, but do differ in nuance.

The words disable and undermine can be used in similar contexts, but disable suggests bringing about impairment or limitation in a physical or mental ability.ĭisabled by an injury sustained at work When is it sensible to use enfeeble instead of undermine?Īlthough the words enfeeble and undermine have much in common, enfeeble implies a condition of marked weakness and helplessness.Įnfeebled by starvation When might weaken be a better fit than undermine? The debilitating effects of surgery When could disable be used to replace undermine? While the synonyms debilitate and undermine are close in meaning, debilitate suggests a less marked or more temporary impairment of strength or vitality. The meanings of cripple and undermine largely overlap however, cripple implies causing a serious loss of functioning power through damaging or removing an essential part or element.Ĭrippled by arthritis When can debilitate be used instead of undermine? While all these words mean 'to lose or cause to lose strength or vigor,' undermine and sap suggest a weakening by something working surreptitiously and insidiously.ĭrugs had sapped his ability to think When is cripple a more appropriate choice than undermine? Some common synonyms of undermine are cripple, debilitate, disable, enfeeble, sap, and weaken. Frequently Asked Questions About undermine How is the word undermine distinct from other similar verbs?

Definition of undermine