5 ms·

Aren't trees the ultimate carbon-capture devices? They are solar powered, turn co2 into building materials, and require very little maintenance.

d_theorist 10y ago
Not really. There's something called the "Forest Carbon Cycle". Forests do not statically capture carbon long term. They are constantly taking carbon in but also releasing it through the death of trees and through the soil. Trees can temporarily capture carbon, but ultimately it will be released again unless they are burned. They also take up a lot of space. [EDIT] I should probably clarify that I have nothing against trees, and they definitely can help with sequestration, and they have lots nice properties. I was mainly reacting against "the ultimate carbon-capture devices", which they really are not.
- likelynew 10y ago
  > Unless they are burned Won't burning the tress will change the stored carbon in the tree to carbon dioxide?
  - DennisP 10y ago
    He's probably referring to biochar. Turning biomass into charcoal, grinding it into powder, and working it into soil is known to sequester carbon for at least a thousand years.
    - d_theorist 10y ago
      Exactly.
- jonstewart 10y ago
  I would love to see engineered wood, like Cross-laminated timber, replace concrete as a structural building material.
  - Neliquat 10y ago
    Why? And laminates are typically petro products.
    - jonstewart 10y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_laminated_timber https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_laminated_timber There's some glue involved, but it removes the carbon stored in the wood from the normal carbon cycle of trees and it would also displace cement/concrete, whose production emits loads of carbon dioxide.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- zebrafish 10y ago
  I've been thinking about economical carbon sequestration uses for the heliostat molten salt reactors. Desalinate sea water (sell fresh water) -> power a generator with steam (sell excess energy) -> grow trees in the desert (sell the trees to a mill) -> go back to start.
DennisP 10y ago
Trees would be great. Right now we're deforesting at massive scale. So first we have to stop doing that, then maybe we can reforest and pull down some carbon, and preserve some biodiversity while we're at it. We probably have to get this done soon, because drought, heat stress, disease, and forest fires are starting to turn some forests into net carbon emitters. But there are also technologies in development that can remove about a thousand times as much CO2 from the air as trees, for a given land area.
- AnimalMuppet 10y ago
  > But there are also technologies in development that can remove about a thousand times as much CO2 from the air as trees, for a given land area. Could you be more specific?

d_theorist 10y ago

Not really. There's something called the "Forest Carbon Cycle". Forests do not statically capture carbon long term. They are constantly taking carbon in but also releasing it through the death of trees and through the soil. Trees can temporarily capture carbon, but ultimately it will be released again unless they are burned. They also take up a lot of space. [EDIT] I should probably clarify that I have nothing against trees, and they definitely can help with sequestration, and they have lots nice properties. I was mainly reacting against "the ultimate carbon-capture devices", which they really are not.

likelynew 10y ago
> Unless they are burned Won't burning the tress will change the stored carbon in the tree to carbon dioxide?
- DennisP 10y ago
  He's probably referring to biochar. Turning biomass into charcoal, grinding it into powder, and working it into soil is known to sequester carbon for at least a thousand years.
  - d_theorist 10y ago
    Exactly.
jonstewart 10y ago
I would love to see engineered wood, like Cross-laminated timber, replace concrete as a structural building material.
- Neliquat 10y ago
  Why? And laminates are typically petro products.
  - jonstewart 10y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_laminated_timber https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_laminated_timber There's some glue involved, but it removes the carbon stored in the wood from the normal carbon cycle of trees and it would also displace cement/concrete, whose production emits loads of carbon dioxide.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
zebrafish 10y ago
I've been thinking about economical carbon sequestration uses for the heliostat molten salt reactors. Desalinate sea water (sell fresh water) -> power a generator with steam (sell excess energy) -> grow trees in the desert (sell the trees to a mill) -> go back to start.

DennisP 10y ago

Trees would be great. Right now we're deforesting at massive scale. So first we have to stop doing that, then maybe we can reforest and pull down some carbon, and preserve some biodiversity while we're at it. We probably have to get this done soon, because drought, heat stress, disease, and forest fires are starting to turn some forests into net carbon emitters. But there are also technologies in development that can remove about a thousand times as much CO2 from the air as trees, for a given land area.

AnimalMuppet 10y ago
> But there are also technologies in development that can remove about a thousand times as much CO2 from the air as trees, for a given land area. Could you be more specific?