Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why isn't bamboo wood a bigger industry?

quora.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–108 of 108 posts

Re: Why isn't bamboo wood a bigger industry?

#101

Post by ianai »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #23
ianai wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iirc, there’s a bamboo tree that grows very fast and has been considered for carbon sequestration. But the problem is, as with all trees, the carbon isn’t locked away from the atmosphere. It also takes up valuable farm land as they need something more like marshland than drier, more common land.

What if they (like trees) just bury it very deeply? Oil and gas are basically old trees and sea life that was buried - stored, and would have been for a very long time if it wasn't due to people.

I’ve wondered this as well. I bet the carbon expense to emplace the bamboo deep enough in the ground prohibits any benefits.

Re: Why isn't bamboo wood a bigger industry?

#103

Post by jpatokal »

kiliantics wrote: post #99
jpatokal wrote: post #4

Bamboo isn't going to replace lumber for most permanent uses, but it sure is handy when you need to put something together in a pinch. I was once trekking in northern Thailand with some Akha hill tribe guides. When it was time for dinner, they cut down a large bamboo and within minutes fashioned essentially a complete dinner service out of it: * A framework for their overnight hut/lean-to * A pot for boiling rice * A…

Is there a pic of the pot? I can't understand how you hold a wooden pot over fire without it burning, and how it can conduct the heat into the water, or how the water was even held in it without leaking.

The "pot" was just a segment ("cell"?) of bamboo with the top lopped off. I was surprised to see this as well, but I presume the water within kept the bamboo from catching fire.

Re: Why isn't bamboo wood a bigger industry?

#104

Post by flukus »

londons_explore wrote: post #91
stinos wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But not too ideal when it comes to air pollution and CO2. Would require comparisions with more local wood transported over land and/or river though to make factual statements about it I guess.

Sea freight is less CO2 per ton mile than any other type of transport: https://timeforchange.org/co2-emissions-shipping-goods

> The following table shows the amount of CO2 (in grams) emitted per metric ton of freight and per km of transportation

Something shipped on truck from nearby will be doing a lot less kilometers total and produce much less total emissions. Usually shipping something around the world will use those less efficient transport methods to complete the trip anyway, so it's an addition and not a replacement.

Re: Why isn't bamboo wood a bigger industry?

#105

Post by siruncledrew »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #14

Relatives that lived in Japan brought back bamboo stuff to the US, and it all cracked within a year or so. The reason was that bamboo does well in wet climates where the moisture in the air keeps in flexible. (or something like that) But in the US, it's much drier (most places) than in Japan. This fits with my experience of bamboo furniture over the years as well. It becomes brittle and fragile the older it gets. But…

If it needs around the same humidity levels as Japan, then bamboo might be good in places like Florida, Louisiana, and Houston at least.

Re: Why isn't bamboo wood a bigger industry?

#106

Post by Laforet »

Tor3 wrote: post #36
Laforet wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bamboo is anisotropic like timber, which means that expansion and contraction caused by drying or temperature variation will happen at different rates along the tangential, longitutional and radial axis. Crack happens when stress exceed the tensile strength of the material in one direction. Thus a long and thin object is less vulnerable to this type of failure as only one axis undergoes a significant change in size.…

I suspect you are correct in your assumptions in the last paragraph, at least about being kiln heated. That seems very likely. There is also a thin layer of something, could be resin or lacquer as you suggest. It is definitely not epoxy though (re. next poster)

The other poster was probably thinking about bamboo fibre-epoxy composite which is more like fibreglass.

I vaguely remember the sealant is not really food safe, which is why many bambio utensils still crack after a few years.

Re: Why isn't bamboo wood a bigger industry?

#107

Post by village-idiot »

OldHand2018 wrote: post #96
Loughla wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What part of the states do you live in? Lumber in the three states in my area is harvested in a completely unsustainable manner. Loggers will purchase the rights to log from farmers, and clear-cut every single piece of whatever is popular at the moment (black walnut right now, Ash and Maple in the 90's). No plan to replant, other than if nature itself makes a recovery.

Are you in the southeast US? A generation ago, so many investors planted trees that it's all but worthless now once you consider the costs of bringing the lumber to market. I imagine that a lot of people just want to liquidate their holdings and get whatever money they can back.

Either way, current estimates are that we're consuming about 42% of the lumber that's growing per year. I'm personally ok with this.

Re: Why isn't bamboo wood a bigger industry?

#108

Post by Khanhanhan »

jopsen wrote: post #85
cmiller1 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a hard problem though, there are so many variables. For example, maybe the one that is more eco-friendly to produce is less durable and in the example of flooring which one is more green could depend on how many people a day you have walking on it and what they weigh.

Also economies of scale have an impact too. An expensive eco-friendly product might be produced in smaller numbers causing more waste through the supply chain. This is all speculation -- but products made a scale are often made with high efficiency. What surely works is when we ask big corporations to do the right thing. Or if we managed to tax environmental impact.

Many big corp products have very high margins and can afford to pay premium taxes on production or they can just charge more. Perhaps the tax income could be used for the good, but, unless such tax is a stigma and consumers can see that 20% of the price is for dirty practices and not i.e. "design", they will pay.
Post reply on HN