4 ms·
Isn't the issue with trees is that they release the carbon back after they die and decompose? You have to actually sequester carbon somehow. No idea how easy it
by sershe 5y ago
Isn't the issue with trees is that they release the carbon back after they die and decompose? You have to actually sequester carbon somehow. No idea how easy it is to do with trees (presumably you'd have to cut them and put them somewhere they don't degrade?).
- marcusverus 5y agoIn terms of getting the most capture for your buck, it seems like you could just harvest the logs, ship them by rail to an arid area, pile them loosely to facilitate drying, and (optionally) treat them with an anti-fungal agent.
- tomjakubowski 5y agoRight, trees provide a buffer. If you can plant faster than the trees are dying, you gain ground.
- vidarh 5y agoAnd as large scale planting projects have shown: planting trees fast and getting them to survive in a cost effective way is a hard problem.
- lostapathy 5y agoTechnically you need to plant trees faster than they rot, not faster than they die. All the trees that were cut down to built my house are not rotting - that carbon is captured and out of the system until/unless my house is burned down or left to rot. It's funny to think - right now "green building" tries to minimize the amount of wood in a structure, but are we approaching a future where green building means locking up as much wood product in a structure as possible, to get it out of the carbon cycle?
- rabidrat 5y ago...can we build houses with them?
- FooBarWidget 5y agoIsn't that offset by the fact that trees replicate?