The Amazon Rainforest: When a Carbon Sink Becomes a Carbon Source

The Amazon rainforest has historically been described as the “lungs of the Earth” — absorbing approximately 2 billion tonnes of CO₂ per year, making it the world’s largest terrestrial carbon sink. That description is now obsolete. [40]

Data published on ScienceDaily between February 16-18, 2026, confirms what satellite observations had been hinting at for years: large sections of the eastern Amazon Basin have flipped from net carbon absorption to net carbon emission. This means the forest is releasing more greenhouse gases than it captures — effectively turning humanity’s greatest natural ally in climate regulation into an adversary. [40]

The Triple Driver: Deforestation, Drought, and Fire

The flip is not caused by a single factor but by the convergence of three interacting pressures:

Deforestation: Despite Brazil’s efforts under the Lula administration, the cumulative loss from decades of clearing has reduced the forest’s total biomass below a critical threshold in eastern regions. The forest edge, now exposed, is far more susceptible to drying. [41]

Mega-Droughts: Climate change has intensified El Niño events and shifted rainfall patterns, subjecting the Amazon to unprecedented droughts. Trees under severe moisture stress not only absorb less CO₂ — they actively die, decompose, and release stored carbon. [42]

Wildfires: Drought-weakened forests burn more easily. The 2024 and 2025 fire seasons were the worst on record, releasing vast quantities of CO₂ and black carbon. Burned areas lose their capacity to regenerate, creating a self-reinforcing feedback loop. [40]

The Feedback Loop: Why This Matters for Global Climate

The Amazon flip creates a dangerous feedback loop: as the forest emits CO₂, it accelerates global warming, which intensifies droughts, which kills more trees, which emits more CO₂. Climate models that assumed the Amazon would continue absorbing carbon through 2050 must now be revised with this reversal factored in — potentially adding hundreds of gigatonnes to atmospheric CO₂ projections. [43]

Offshore Wind Farms: The Unintended Disruption of Ocean Circulation

As countries race to build offshore wind capacity to meet decarbonization targets, research published in mid-February 2026 reveals a concerning side effect: large offshore wind farms are measurably altering ocean currents and mixing patterns within their operational zones. [45]

The Wake Effect on Water

Just as wind turbines on land create “wind wakes” — zones of reduced wind speed and altered turbulence downstream — offshore turbines alter the atmospheric boundary layer over the ocean surface. Since surface winds drive the upper layer of ocean currents, large wind farm arrays create localized changes in current speed (5-7% reduction), temperature mixing, and nutrient transport. [46]

Research from monitoring stations around the North Sea wind farms documented measurable changes in water column stratification — the layering of warm and cold water — which has implications for marine biodiversity, fisheries productivity, and local climate at the coast. [45]

The Scale Problem

Current offshore wind installations total approximately 70 GW globally. Plans for 2030 call for over 300 GW. The mid-February research suggests that at these scales, cumulative wake effects could alter regional ocean dynamics in ways that current environmental impact assessments do not account for. [47]

This does not mean offshore wind is wrong — it means environmental assessment frameworks must evolve to account for system effects beyond the individual turbine. The interaction between energy infrastructure and ocean ecosystems adds a new layer of complexity to the green energy transition. [46]

The Economics of Resilience: Alaska’s Permanent Fund and the Tariff Shock

With U.S. tariff rates surging to their highest levels since the 1930s — with a blended effective rate approaching 25% on key trading partners — the economic conversation has shifted from growth optimization to resilience engineering. [50]

Alaska as a Natural Experiment

Alaska’s Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) provides every state resident with an annual cash payment derived from the state’s oil wealth reserves. In 2025, this payment was approximately $1,312 per person. While modest, the PFD creates a measurable “resilience buffer” — households with access to unconditional cash payments show significantly lower rates of severe financial distress during economic shocks. [51]

Research trending in mid-February 2026 examines this model in the context of tariff-driven price increases. Alaska’s consumer inflation impact from tariffs is partially offset by the PFD, creating a natural experiment in whether Universal Basic Income (UBI)-style payments can function as a “shock absorber” for trade policy. [52]

The Broader Resilience Architecture

The Alaska model suggests that economic resilience may require a shift from growth-oriented policy (low taxes, high GDP targets) to buffer-oriented policy (sovereign wealth, direct transfers, diversified revenue). This is particularly relevant as climate adaptation costs, trade war volatility, and supply chain disruptions make traditional growth paths unreliable. [52]