4 ms·

36 percent of the US is covered by forest (1). 38 percent of the EU is covered by forest. That's EU with Britain. Without Britain, the percentage is higher (2).

by flexie 5y ago

36 percent of the US is covered by forest (1). 38 percent of the EU is covered by forest. That's EU with Britain. Without Britain, the percentage is higher (2). I realize I use different sources, and that maybe all forests are not equally good for lumber production. But Europe has as much forests as the US. Yes, a lot of it is concentrated in Scandinavia and Eastern Europe, so traditionally, that would have been less accessible to most central and western European countries. Also, traditionally, there was far more farm land. But nowadays, Europeans could access lumber as easily as Americans. 1:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forests_of_the_United_States#:~:text=As%20of%202016%2C%20roughly%2036.21,of%20its%20old%20growth%20forests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forests_of_the_United_States#:.... 2:https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/forestry-statistics/forestry-statistics-2018/international-forestry/forest-cover-international-comparisons/ https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statis...

adolph 5y ago
US: 818,814,000 acres (3,313,622 square kilometers). EU: 161,000,000 ha ha = ac / 2.4711 818,814,000 / 2.4711 = 331,356,076 Ok, the US has roughly double the forested surface area. EU pop is 448m compared to US' 328m. So with 30% more population and half the forested surface area wood does seem scarser in the EU. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=EU-US-CN https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=E...
- dmichulke 5y ago
  Didn't check the numbers but I'd guess including European Russia or non-EU Balkans or Norway would totally change your results. Then again, including Canada would probably as well.
  - adolph 5y ago
    I just used the parent comment numbers converted to same unit with the first DDGed population result. Comparing pct land forested seemed an odd ratio to me. Population seemed to be a better proxy for housing demand. Pop density and other factors would probably confound but tree per capita seems to matter than tree per surface area.
- hef19898 5y ago
  And that's why the US market is eating most of Europe's construction wood supply at the moment? Which, by the way, is sourced to a significant degree from the former Soviet Union. So comparing EU forest surface with the US is somewhat misleading.
  - pharke 5y ago
    If "at the moment" is the past year and a half then it's because lumber prices have tripled or quadrupled so of course it makes sense to buy far afield and ship if the price is lower.
    - hef19898 5y ago
      Prices increased because the US and China are buying up everything, not the other way round.
      - pharke 5y ago
        Yes increased demand drives increases in price if the supply is limited. Production has been constrained everywhere for the past year and a half so buyers have had to source material from further away than usual.
- dsq 5y ago
  Canada is right next door as well, with trees that can just float down the river
gjhh244 5y ago
Unsurprisingly a lot of houses are built from wood in Nordic countries and Eastern Europe. It's just tradition limiting its use in some parts.
- philwelch 5y ago
  "Tradition", I think, understates things a bit. In any region, there are going to be specific factors of soil, climate, infrastructure, etc. that all affect how you would build homes. Transporting materials is expensive, so the availability of local materials is also a factor, though less of a factor than it used to be. Builders and skilled tradesman in any region are going to have knowledge and practical experience with these local factors, and with the techniques and materials that address those factors. And to some degree, you're better off with the type of house that they're really good at building than the type of house that they're less experienced with. If you're comparing the US and EU though, I think you also need to account for culture and language barriers. Construction techniques and materials across the US are more similar because builders and tradesmen from Oregon, Arizona, Texas, and Florida can all communicate more easily than builders and tradesman from across Europe.
philwelch 5y ago
> Europe has as much forests as the US. Yes, a lot of it is concentrated in Scandinavia and Eastern Europe... I'm pretty sure Scandinavian houses do tend to use wood. Likewise, less forested parts of the US, like Arizona, tend to have fewer wooden houses.

by flexie 5y ago

adolph 5y ago

US: 818,814,000 acres (3,313,622 square kilometers). EU: 161,000,000 ha ha = ac / 2.4711 818,814,000 / 2.4711 = 331,356,076 Ok, the US has roughly double the forested surface area. EU pop is 448m compared to US' 328m. So with 30% more population and half the forested surface area wood does seem scarser in the EU. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=EU-US-CN https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=E...

dmichulke 5y ago
Didn't check the numbers but I'd guess including European Russia or non-EU Balkans or Norway would totally change your results. Then again, including Canada would probably as well.
- adolph 5y ago
  I just used the parent comment numbers converted to same unit with the first DDGed population result. Comparing pct land forested seemed an odd ratio to me. Population seemed to be a better proxy for housing demand. Pop density and other factors would probably confound but tree per capita seems to matter than tree per surface area.
hef19898 5y ago
And that's why the US market is eating most of Europe's construction wood supply at the moment? Which, by the way, is sourced to a significant degree from the former Soviet Union. So comparing EU forest surface with the US is somewhat misleading.
- pharke 5y ago
  If "at the moment" is the past year and a half then it's because lumber prices have tripled or quadrupled so of course it makes sense to buy far afield and ship if the price is lower.
  - hef19898 5y ago
    Prices increased because the US and China are buying up everything, not the other way round.
    - pharke 5y ago
      Yes increased demand drives increases in price if the supply is limited. Production has been constrained everywhere for the past year and a half so buyers have had to source material from further away than usual.
dsq 5y ago
Canada is right next door as well, with trees that can just float down the river

gjhh244 5y ago

Unsurprisingly a lot of houses are built from wood in Nordic countries and Eastern Europe. It's just tradition limiting its use in some parts.

philwelch 5y ago
"Tradition", I think, understates things a bit. In any region, there are going to be specific factors of soil, climate, infrastructure, etc. that all affect how you would build homes. Transporting materials is expensive, so the availability of local materials is also a factor, though less of a factor than it used to be. Builders and skilled tradesman in any region are going to have knowledge and practical experience with these local factors, and with the techniques and materials that address those factors. And to some degree, you're better off with the type of house that they're really good at building than the type of house that they're less experienced with. If you're comparing the US and EU though, I think you also need to account for culture and language barriers. Construction techniques and materials across the US are more similar because builders and tradesmen from Oregon, Arizona, Texas, and Florida can all communicate more easily than builders and tradesman from across Europe.

philwelch 5y ago

> Europe has as much forests as the US. Yes, a lot of it is concentrated in Scandinavia and Eastern Europe... I'm pretty sure Scandinavian houses do tend to use wood. Likewise, less forested parts of the US, like Arizona, tend to have fewer wooden houses.