13 ms·
What a waste, turning a forest into decks!
by deepfriedchokes 3y ago
What a waste, turning a forest into decks!
- bamboozled 3y agoAustralia, ancient precious rain forests turned into bark chips
- Cyberdog 3y agoAnd lumber for other parts of houses as well, and wooden furniture, and paper products. And since trees in managed forests are grown denser than they grow naturally, a thicker, more carbon-capturing forest was planted in its place.
- akira2501 3y agoTrees grow back. Decks are nice. Wood sourced and used in the same state is good practice.
- NewJazz 3y agoIs it used in the same state? How much gets exported overseas? Continuous clear cutting is bound to dry out the soil eventually.
- throwup238 3y agoWood is cheap and the fuel to move it is expensive. No one in Europe is buying American Douglas Fir or Pine.
- jjtheblunt 3y agoAre American Ikea products not scandinavian pine?
- ferongr 3y agoNo, they're cheap Chinese honeycomb paper and low density particle board.
- CorrectHorseBat 3y agoWood isn't cheap in Europe though, we definitely do buy wood from overseas.
- hnbad 3y agoWe also sell wood to the US.
- NewJazz 3y agoIn fact Britain buys wood from US eastern forests just to burn it for fuel. https://theconversation.com/british-power-stations-are-burning-wood-from-us-forests-to-meet-renewables-targets-54969 https://theconversation.com/british-power-stations-are-burni...
- NewJazz 3y agoEverything in your comment is false. https://www.forest2market.com/blog/pacific-northwest-log-markets-domestic-and-export-prices-diverge https://www.forest2market.com/blog/pacific-northwest-log-mar...
- GeoAtreides 3y ago> Trees grow back. But old growth forests don't. Not on human scale, at least.
- akira2501 3y agoWhat's special about "old growth" forests?
- AnotherGoodName 3y agoMaking things out of wood might just be the most environmentally friendly thing to make things out of though. Mining and refining mined products seems terrible in comparison and the Petro chemical industry is definitely harmful. We need to make sure the wood is responsibly harvested as much as possible but turning trees into part of a home is a actually pretty much inline with how nature works in general.
- slavik81 3y agoTrees take hundreds of years to grow that large. If we replanted the forest today, it would take until perhaps the year 2500 to restore the forest to its former glory. A redwood forest is, on the scale of a human lifespan, a non-renewable resource.
- Cyberdog 3y agoIf by "redwood forest" you only mean old-growth forests, sure. The trees being harvested commercially today are only a few decades old. Second-growth and managed forests won't have the occasional ancient giants the old-growth ones have but they are still clearly forests to the humans and other animals living among them.
- slavik81 3y agoI mean the forest in the article that was turned into decking. > The trees being harvested commercially today are only a few decades old. The province of British Columbia publishes figures on old growth logging. They're cutting down ~40,000 hectares per year. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/old-growth-logging-british-columbia-how-much-is-harvested-each-year-1.6987777 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/old-growth-l...
- UncleEntity 3y agoI don't think anyone defends what they were doing to the redwoods in the 80s and 90s. But, you know, public opinion changes, policies change and, as it turns out, they have learned a lot about the ecosystem from studying how the clear-cut areas regrow.
- dataviz1000 3y agoIs a deck considered sequestered carbon?
- lisper 3y agoYes. At least until it decomposes or burns.
- blagie 3y agoOne of my professors once told me that we have too much CO2 in the atmosphere, and that the best thing we could do to the planet was to cut down trees, bury them, plant more trees, cut those down, and bury those. If they become decks, paper, or other useful products in between, reducing usage of plastics things which emit carbon, so much the better. Convince me otherwise.
- KorematsuFredt 3y agoYour prof was correct. We need to cut down existing large trees, put them into long term use where they can be used for 100+ years and plant new trees in their place. It is the simplest and very natural way to capture carbon. Fully grown trees are mostly carbon neutral, growing trees on other hand are capturing carbon. Perhaps we can cut down large trees, coat them with very durable recycled plastic and simply store them on coastal line. Canada and USA can heavily subsidize logging industry where 1. They have 100 year plan to plant and cut trees. 2. Wood gets exported to poorer countries where deforestation is a problem.
- asimpletune 3y agoProbably, but let’s leave the super nice movie trees
- sirtaj 3y agoYour prof is not wrong in theory, but in practice we are failing at 3. plant more trees.
- hnbad 3y agoThe new growth also needs to account for the emissions of cutting down and processing the old trees (even with solar, machines don't run on sunshine alone) and planting/nurturing the new growth itself. The prof was likely just trying to be provocative, not speaking based on thorough modelling.
- huuhee3 3y agoUsing concrete for building also causes massive emissions. Generally speaking, making long lasting buildings from wood is ecological compared to alternatives. Of course doing the harvesting in a sustainable way and replanting are necessary for this to be true. IMO old growth forests should be protected, but at the same time we should plant new industrial forests as much as possible, and harvest them for building material. Old agricultural land that is no longer used for farming is ideal for that.
- ktosobcy 3y agoIt's kinda sad to see most commenter focusing on short sighted utility (only serves as a co2 capture and source of material, and we can grown terrible trees fast)... Maybe the mentality would be different if we haven't ef-uped our planed by exploiting oil to drive oversized gas-guzzlers to the sprawling single-family oversized homes? but no... better keep ruining beautiful nature...