Tree planting: Where can I do it and which type is best? • Hacker News Board

Re: Tree planting: Where can I do it and which type is best?

#71

Post by aresant » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 5:09 PM UTC

tunesmith wrote: post #67

aresant wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe sounds too much like spouting from the climate change denier camp? Which I am the opposite of. There are a lot of flower & daisy soft solutions to C02. Drive to the suburban forest in your SUV, plant 100 trees that will inevitably be cut down long before they have a carbon negative impact, come home and run your AC. You're still running 1000/1 in negative C02 balance. Vs finds ways to dramatically cut use, doub…

We've gotta get past the argument pattern of "don't reduce consumption; sequester!" and "don't sequester; reduce consumption!" A lot of both are needed. I agree with the point that planting 100 trees should not leave anyone feeling they've done their part. Repeating the math until we're blue in the face is what helps there I guess.

Fair point.

But convincing the entire population of the world to set their thermostat 1 degree higher during the summer months would have a 1000x multiple impact on a 40x shorter time scale than if every one of those people planted a tree.

The spirit of my comment is that in general people LOVE the path of least resistance.

Ask the average person about combatting climate change and their response is "plant more trees".

Because that's easy, shit you can pay the gardener to do it or donate $10 to a plant the tree collective and feel instant gratification with no sacrifice.

Vs the highest possible impact solution which is cutting personal consumption - even a little bit!

Re: Tree planting: Where can I do it and which type is best?

#72

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 5:16 PM UTC

aresant wrote: post #71

tunesmith wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've gotta get past the argument pattern of "don't reduce consumption; sequester!" and "don't sequester; reduce consumption!" A lot of both are needed. I agree with the point that planting 100 trees should not leave anyone feeling they've done their part. Repeating the math until we're blue in the face is what helps there I guess.

Fair point. But convincing the entire population of the world to set their thermostat 1 degree higher during the summer months would have a 1000x multiple impact on a 40x shorter time scale than if every one of those people planted a tree. The spirit of my comment is that in general people LOVE the path of least resistance. Ask the average person about combatting climate change and their response is "plant more trees…

[deleted]

Re: Tree planting: Where can I do it and which type is best?

#73

Post by BeefySwain » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 5:21 PM UTC

aresant wrote: post #36

jerkstate wrote: post #7

I did a rough spreadsheet some time back based on this 1998 EPA carbon sequestration worksheet [1] and found that an average person from a high carbon output country needs about 600-1000 trees to offset their carbon output. There are about 3 trillion trees for a population of 7 billion people for an average of 428 trees per person, so that means you have to make up the delta of about 172 to 572 trees over the course…

No easy way to plot this - planting trees to sequester CO2 may or may not have a net positive impact at scale for a variety of reasons: 1) The timescale is very long - a single tree to drive carbon neutrality is MOST optimistically pegged at 40 - 100 years depending on species. With expanding populations planning or guaranteeing execution on that time scale is limited. AKA it's very unlikely that most efforts, unless…

How is using wood as a building material bad? I would think that putting carbon into our walls and patios would be as good a place as any to keep it out of the atmosphere?

Re: Tree planting: Where can I do it and which type is best?

#74

Post by pvaldes » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 5:22 PM UTC

dx87 wrote: post #14

rebuilder wrote: post #4

My wife and I have a property with a good bit of forest. It's mostly fir trees and birch. Every now and then I wonder if there's some way to increase the co2 uptake of the forest, but the question appears surprisingly complicated, and so far my conclusion has been to just leave it be. Has anyone looked into this?

There was an article posted recently that said the best way to increase the co2 uptake is by cutting down the fully grown trees and planting new trees. Full grown trees don't absord as much co2 as a tree that is still growing, and the needles that some trees drop make the ground acidic, preventing new trees from growing. The problem is that you have to find something to do with all the wood so the captured co2 doesn'…

> Full grown trees don't absord as much co2 as a tree that is still growing

This does not seem logical. Two cars emit more C02 than one car. Two leaves will absorb more CO2 than one leaf. A 2m young tree will never be able to consum so many CO2 as its older 40m high grandparent with a x10000 mass (mass that must be maintained).

Re: Tree planting: Where can I do it and which type is best?

#75

Post by armenarmen » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 5:30 PM UTC

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #69

hillz wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a tree is planted, grows, and then for example is burned down and paved over, that'd be true. But if a tree grows and eventually dies in a forest, it'll be replaced with new trees naturally, cancelling out the CO2 leaked from the tree dying. This C02 can also be stalled by harvesting the tree and using it in some way that stops C02 from being released for a longer time than natural.

I did some math on this, and if all the countries in the advanced world planted fast growing trees alongside all paved and unpaved roads, over 40 years, that could potentially be enough to sequester half of all carbon emitted by humans. Given that carbon has a half life of between 20-200 years, and that we appear to be reaching peak emissions, and that a lot of estimates say our emissions should drop by 70% just give…

Could you share your math somewhere? I’m genuinely interested, and did your calculations take into account lowered cooling costs caused by tree shaded buildings?

Re: Tree planting: Where can I do it and which type is best?

#76

Post by hinkley » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 5:31 PM UTC

jerkstate wrote: post #7

I did a rough spreadsheet some time back based on this 1998 EPA carbon sequestration worksheet [1] and found that an average person from a high carbon output country needs about 600-1000 trees to offset their carbon output. There are about 3 trillion trees for a population of 7 billion people for an average of 428 trees per person, so that means you have to make up the delta of about 172 to 572 trees over the course…

I recall there being some considerable surprise when they figured out that trees gain mass (of which a fraction is carbon) faster as they get older.

It's not that shocking. If two tree rings are the same width, the outer one contains more material due to the larger circumference. The surface area of a tree increases every year until it starts to decline. In a healthy tree, canopy and roots are balanced, and any gain or loss in material above ground is mirrored below. Dead roots rejoin the food chain much, much slower than twigs and leaves, so nearly half the carbon that goes into the tree goes into the ground and stays there, even if you cut the tree for timber. And due to root fusion, some of the roots may survive... if you didn't cut down all of the trees of the same species. I'm looking at you, timber industry.

Re: Tree planting: Where can I do it and which type is best?

#77

Post by sokoloff » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 5:32 PM UTC

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #69

hillz wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a tree is planted, grows, and then for example is burned down and paved over, that'd be true. But if a tree grows and eventually dies in a forest, it'll be replaced with new trees naturally, cancelling out the CO2 leaked from the tree dying. This C02 can also be stalled by harvesting the tree and using it in some way that stops C02 from being released for a longer time than natural.

I did some math on this, and if all the countries in the advanced world planted fast growing trees alongside all paved and unpaved roads, over 40 years, that could potentially be enough to sequester half of all carbon emitted by humans. Given that carbon has a half life of between 20-200 years, and that we appear to be reaching peak emissions, and that a lot of estimates say our emissions should drop by 70% just give…

What does "carbon has a half life of between 20-200 years" mean in this comment?

Re: Tree planting: Where can I do it and which type is best?

#78

Post by sokoloff » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 5:34 PM UTC

guelo wrote: post #45

dsr_ wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is why you outsource the tree planting to a place that has room for trees -- and it's more efficient because they can grow trees better than you can, anyway. nationalforests.org, the Arbor Day Foundation... there are probably lots of good options.

nationalforests.org does reforesting of recently burned forests which are probably burning more frequently due to climate change. I don't think replacing forests that were alive when you were born should count as offsetting your personal CO2 emissions, if the idea is to have an actual effect it has to be new trees in new forests.

If it's a tree/forest that wouldn't have otherwise existed but for your donation/their action, I think it should count.

Whether it's at a lat/long that previously held a tree or not is largely irrelevant when considering whether your action was helpful or neutral.

Re: Tree planting: Where can I do it and which type is best?

#79

Post by mabbo » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 5:35 PM UTC

pvaldes wrote: post #74

dx87 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was an article posted recently that said the best way to increase the co2 uptake is by cutting down the fully grown trees and planting new trees. Full grown trees don't absord as much co2 as a tree that is still growing, and the needles that some trees drop make the ground acidic, preventing new trees from growing. The problem is that you have to find something to do with all the wood so the captured co2 doesn'…

> Full grown trees don't absord as much co2 as a tree that is still growing This does not seem logical. Two cars emit more C02 than one car. Two leaves will absorb more CO2 than one leaf. A 2m young tree will never be able to consum so many CO2 as its older 40m high grandparent with a x10000 mass (mass that must be maintained).

> Two leaves will absorb more CO2 than one leaf

Trees don't absorb CO2 just by existing- they absorb CO2 by growing. The carbon from the air is converted into structure, body of the tree. When the tree stops growing, the CO2 stops being absorbed.

Cutting down the tree and using the wood for long-term storage contains all that CO2. Planting new trees means growing trees that absorb more CO2 from the air.

Re: Tree planting: Where can I do it and which type is best?

#80

Post by rohittidke » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 5:37 PM UTC

Could we plant trees in parking lots? A law must be made. In the US especially West Coast (Seattle) for example and also in Germany a lot of flat space has been taken by parking lots. Its actually crazy seeing these huge parking lots. Could we plant verticle wines and change the geometry (introducing gradients to add area for a tree - simple pythogoras concept) to add space for at least a tree per car slot or maybe at times even more.