Hacker News Reader

I don't know where OP got that from, but we don't actually need to use it, an a lot of things live there. It isn't all just bare sun bleached rock and sand. https://www.desertmuseum.org/desert/sonora.php

View on HN

"things live there" can also be true about gamma-ray sterilized canned food[0]. That doesn't mean it's important to the continued functioning of the ecosphere. Also, some deserts are more lifeless than others.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinococcus_radiodurans

I don't see what point you are making that contradict my original comment. Yes deserts are less important to the health of the planet than biodiversity hotspots, but why would we destroy them when we have other alternatives?

Hasn't area of desert increased a lot in recent years. We hear, for example, about increased desertification in Saharan Africa. If we reverse some of that desertification that would seem to help?

From my other comment:

desertification is the destruction of arable land, not the expansion of healthy desert ecosystems. Healthy desert ecosystems are disappearing, not expanding

Then they're orthogonal, and siting such projects on land that has become desert in the last century, say, will not harm these "healthy desert ecosystems" you speak of?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com