4 ms·
They don't really ever change to be net emmitters, and it takes a long time for them to stop absorbing carbon ( a few hundred years)
by quixoticelixer- 7y ago
They don't really ever change to be net emmitters, and it takes a long time for them to stop absorbing carbon ( a few hundred years)
- benj111 7y agoDo you have a source? Because you're directly contradicting the article.
- aukust 7y agoAnecdotal evidence suggests to me that European spruce stores more CO2 than it sheds way over 80 years old as a spruce grows in mass significantly decades after reaching that age. However here is a study that tries to bring some light to carbon pools on over-mature 167-213 year-old trees: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/9/7/435/pdf https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/9/7/435/pdf
- bryanlarsen 7y agoAnecdotal evidence tells me that spruce trees are really good at suppressing undergrowth due to their acidic needless so claiming a mature first is a net emitter makes sense to me. The trees may be growing, but nothing else is.
- quixoticelixer- 7y agoWardle, P. (1991). Vegetation of New Zealand. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. If I have time tomorrow i'll find the page.
- benj111 7y agoIs it possible we're talking about different things? You talking about individual trees and the article talking about forests as a whole.
- quixoticelixer- 7y agoNo, if anything individual trees do start to become emitter as they age due to low growth and decay, how ever in forests old dying trees are quickly replaced by new ones.
- garmaine 7y agoYou don’t need a source. To be a net emitter the tree would have to be losing mass. That’s not what healthy trees do, even old ones. I believe the article might have been trying to say is that trees tend to die and decompose (or burn) which makes them carbon emitters.
- benj111 7y agoYou're talking about individual trees though. Theres plenty of mechanisms where the individual trees grow, but the forest holds less carbon. The linked article [1] mentions forest fires and insect infestations. [1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/canada-forests-carbon-sink-or-source-1.5011490 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/canada-forests-carbon...
- jefftk 7y agoIf a tree keeps growing, but also gets more successful at suppressing growth of it's neighbors, then it can be a net emitter overall even though it's a net absorber considered individually.
- Robotbeat 7y agoThat’s not true. Methane is a significantly more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, so if the tree is absorbing CO2 but the decomposing needles and leaves are emitting methane, it could easily be a net GHG emitter.
- garmaine 7y agoTrees don’t produce CH4 (except in decomposition).