5 ms·
It seems to require a lot more effort than traditional lumber and can't really be mass produced. I doubt the output/input ratio (whatever you consider as the in
by fireattack 5y ago
It seems to require a lot more effort than traditional lumber and can't really be mass produced. I doubt the output/input ratio (whatever you consider as the input: man-hour, monetary cost, carbon footprint) is any better either.
In other words, I think it's more like a luxury, and I won't call luxury items "sustainable".
- wtallis 5y agoThis doesn't seem to be a luxury method of producing general-purpose lumber, but a technique for producing special-purpose lumber. The alternative way to get similar quality lumber would seem to be logging old-growth forests, and in that light this method would certainly appear to be much more sustainable, even if it cannot satisfy all the demand for all kinds of lumber.
- Ensorceled 5y ago> ... It seems ... I doubt ... I think ... So no real evidence. > I won't call luxury items "sustainable" How is wood a "luxury" item. Fruit and nut orchards both require significant man-hour and monetary effort, they would also be considered unsustainable luxuries using these rules.