Live data from Hacker News

Hardened wood as a renewable alternative to steel and plastic

cell.com

191–200 of 282 posts

Re: Hardened wood as a renewable alternative to steel and plastic

#191
post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can also coke iron with carbon from plastic. It's still not super great. But it does reuse plastics which don't get recycled enough.

Reusing plastics is honestly one of those "do we need to" things these days. The theory is that if we reuse them, then the waste doesn't pollute the environment - but landfilled plastic waste is basically sequestered carbon, and plastic pollution is ocean-borne and mostly being directly produced by poor environmental practice - not unrecycled plastic waste or landfill escape.

Yeah I agree, I'm pretty pro, bury plastic in the ground, but I figure if we need to coke steel rather than digging up coal we can just divert a few trucks.

Re: Hardened wood as a renewable alternative to steel and plastic

#192
post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can also coke iron with carbon from plastic. It's still not super great. But it does reuse plastics which don't get recycled enough.

Reusing plastics is honestly one of those "do we need to" things these days. The theory is that if we reuse them, then the waste doesn't pollute the environment - but landfilled plastic waste is basically sequestered carbon, and plastic pollution is ocean-borne and mostly being directly produced by poor environmental practice - not unrecycled plastic waste or landfill escape.

Yeah seriously, bury the plastic really deep away from water tables and forget about it. We clearly can’t recycle most of the stuff. Couple that with moving away from a frivolous use of plastic and I think we are golden. There are a bunch of abandoned mines miles away from substantial water tables. Fill those up.

Re: Hardened wood as a renewable alternative to steel and plastic

#193
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Petroleum is definitely more environmentally friendly than the timber industry. You probably haven't driven around tree farms - monoculture that destroys the environment for hundreds of square miles. Even worse is when they pulp existing forest for things like toilet paper: https://www.rcinet.ca/en/2019/02/26/u-s-use-of-toilet-paper-...

That's an article about toilet paper usage, not building material. There's no petroleum toilet paper, by the way. Wood is biodegradable, renewable, and recyclable. It can be grown and harvested sustainably; I know because I used to work with a guy who made a living off surveying forestry for sustainable timber harvesting. It causes no environmental issues if left to rot, doesn't have to be disposed of in a particular…

Wood itself is sustainable, but in making a choice of building materials, we're also looking for total embedded energy cost and impact of the final product. Traditional buildings from a century ago relied on the harvest of old-growth wood with denser rings than the new sustainable forestry, and they were built with fewer features - when built well they didn't fail, but they weren't targeting high energy performance, climate control, dust and mold resistance, etc. We can't go back - we could lower our standards but the stock of old-growth remains depleted. New wood constructions often use processed and glued timbers because the processed timbers can be lighter(good glue is really strong) and they don't experience nearly as many quality control issues(solid wood tends to warp).

The thing is, once we start looking at wood in detail, it's never just wood. It's wood, plus adhesives, paints, and finish. You can't use just wood because it rots - you at least need to add some pigment to block UV rays and drainage to limit water pooling. Each of those additives are a potential source of VOCs(volatile organic compounds, the term that more accurately describes "chemicals"). And each step taken during processing adds energy cost. Paper and corrugated cardboard are not innocuous - they use one of the higher-energy processes relative to the amount of input material.

When you look at what you can do besides wood, you get similar tradeoffs. Stone is great, but it's still hard to work with directly, hard enough to not scale to our industrial population - as it stands, you need an artisianal economy of stonemasons to make those huge ancient constructions. Concrete has a huge climate footprint and the dust is a major VOC source. Steel is high-energy and not abundant enough to be used everywhere.

Thus, plastics enter as a way of getting some of the qualities we want. Plastics are not all one of a kind and have varying VOC content. We can't afford not to use them to have this population and quality of life, which means we have to study how to use them safely. The microplastic issue is a part of that, but it's oversold as "plastic is scary". Wood smoke is also scary, as anyone who has been around a wildfire will attest.

Re: Hardened wood as a renewable alternative to steel and plastic

#194

Wood is renewable when you can grow it, cut it up into useful shapes, then at the end of its useful life, compost it. As soon as you add a shit load of processing and plastic and other stuff it's not "wood" anymore than gasoline is a dead dinosaur. As for things like plywood that use glue for the laminations...glue is the most expensive and important part of the product. Not the wood so much. Replacing steel? I don't…

Why are people not considering just growing large trees to capture carbon cut down those trees and just coat them in plastic and throw them at the bottom of ocean/desert or some kind of storage where this carbon can stay trapped for thousands of years ? What am I missing ? I think growing trees is better than just capturing CO2 directly as growing a large forest might have other advantages and a lot of wood can be us…

I'll never understand why it's always "stop climate change" or "deny climate change" but there's essentially no room for "fix climate change" or "reverse climate change". The resources are allocated for polarization and not pragmatism.

Re: Hardened wood as a renewable alternative to steel and plastic

#195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In addition progress making steel with a lot less CO2, by using hydrogen (and other techniques) instead of coal has come a long way. This isn't just pie in the sky, the world's second largest steel maker plans to reduce CO2 by 30% before 2030. [1] And of course steel is eminently recyclable. I'm not against wood but steel has some good long term attributes as well. [1] https://corporate.arcelormittal.com/sustainabili…

You can also coke iron with carbon from plastic. It's still not super great. But it does reuse plastics which don't get recycled enough.

I suppose it solves littering but in the end you're still just burning plastics and turning them into CO2, which isn't great.

Re: Hardened wood as a renewable alternative to steel and plastic

#196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We survive on stored energy borrowed from the past. It's worse than that: We fully rely on borrowed time ! Natural geological cycles to restore surface phosphorus span many thousands of years. Our current agriculture (food production) critically depends on mineral phosphorus, which may be exhausted in just four or five decades. And we retain none of that, but flush our soils into the oceans (partially through the t…

Does it also mean that using wood at industrial scale is bad idea? Trees need phosphorus too

I can only speculate.

I think wood itself contains little phosphorus, compared to other parts of the plant. The inner rings of a tree are dead cells, a formerly living tissue, which condensed to cellulose and lignin. I assume the plant will not have phosphorus left there substantially. Phosphorus is needed to make ADP and DNA, by all living things, and is used in photosynthesis by plants, too. Quite useless in the middle of the dead wood zone. In woody plants, only the outer layers and leaves are living cells. If you leave those in the forest to rot, you retain some phosphorus.

You could also burn furniture after a century of use for energy and then bring the ash back into the forest to close the cycle, I guess. But that's requires non-toxic ashes - compatible paints and glues, no heavy metal agents and so on.

Either way, you are in competition with agriculture land use for food production. And bio fuels. And bio polymers. And bio... You get the idea.

Tho, if I had to guess, I would say wood probably is not the worst in terms of phosphorus leakage.

Re: Hardened wood as a renewable alternative to steel and plastic

#197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This study disagrees with your claims. https://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/pdf2012/fpl_2012_dagenais...

A study conducted by two fucking industry trade groups and the USDA Forest Products lab? > FPInnovations is a private not-for-profit R&D organization that specializes in the creation of solutions that accelerate the growth of the Canadian forest sector and its affiliated industries to enhance their global competitiveness Did you read the fucking introduction? It's an industry-paid-for shill study: > Financial support…

Don't be a dick. Since you're clearly not going to do your own research and will simply accuse people of disagreeing with you of being industry shills, here are some more articles discussing non-industry studies that show you're full of hot air:

https://www.fastcompany.com/90545929/mass-timber-is-the-futu...,

https://blogs.oregonstate.edu/collegeofforestry/2018/03/27/p... (demonstrating that charred CLT can maintain structural integrity at temperatures that could cause steel structures to soften and collapse. Or in other words, that steel structures can be less safe in the event of a fire than a wood structure.

Re: Hardened wood as a renewable alternative to steel and plastic

#198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because 20 million trees planted would offset US emissions by 2 days. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqht2bIQXIY

But I can’t tell if 20 million trees is a lot or a little.

The amount of effort required for 10 million trees a day would require everyone in the US to plant a tree each month. This would likely also require people to care for enough saplings to plant a new tree each month.

It's not an insurmountable level of effort per person, but if you try to do it on a large scale you inevitably end up with logistical problems, and it would require quite a lot of space.

Re: Hardened wood as a renewable alternative to steel and plastic

#199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because 20 million trees planted would offset US emissions by 2 days. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqht2bIQXIY

I wonder if there's any legs in algae or seaweed. Wouldn't take up valuable land to grow and is fast growing.

Seaweed is great - it also pulls excess nitrogen out of the water, can be co-cropped with bivalves, can be fed to cows for decreased methane production, can be eaten directly in many forms…

If we had an actual price on carbon seaweed production would be a boom industry.

Re: Hardened wood as a renewable alternative to steel and plastic

#200
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Steel is amazing - and as a result we use it in all kinds of places where its properties aren't fully utilized. Aluminum has been growing into that role of "steel alternative", but there's still room for other alternatives.

Looking back at Aluminium, it was once very costly - there was no economical way to extract it from clay by traditional metallurgy. When the Hall process of electrolytic extraction from molten salts was invented = huge price decline, and useage. Titanium is in a similar position, fairly common, but hard to extract economically. I hope there is a low cost electrolytic to recover Titanium found some day, as it is a ver…

>Looking back at Aluminium, it was once very costly - there was no economical way to extract it from clay by traditional metallurgy.

Supposedly Napoleon III had aluminum tableware for his most honored guests, and gold for everyone else.

Post reply on HN