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

Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

e360.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 332 posts

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#271

Post by jonnycomputer »

ryanjshaw wrote: post #113
ChuckMcM wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cuts into my solar power generation through. So its a trade-off. Interestingly enough, from an energy production perspective the solar panels on the roof result in more reduction in CO2 than the trees do.

Trees come with a whole bunch of other issues. I have something like 40 trees ranging up to 20m tall. Cleaning up the leaves and branches is a year-round job. Collecting and removing the waste involves time, money and CO2 producing trucks. If not removed promptly, waste left up on my flat roof causes water damage after rains. Heavy storms make me nervous because I've once seen a set of healthy branches large enough t…

I've had several trees fall this year, on or around my house. Wet year, and windy too. If they're near your house, you need to invest in making sure they're healthy trees! I'm thinking of planting new trees further back from the house, near the creek.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#272

Post by jonnycomputer »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #212
jweir wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you prove that or back that up with some facts?

I can tell you how I reason to it. According to many sources, but I will cite this one[1] a single tree converts about 50 lbs of CO2 in a year. There are three trees on my property, a city tree (planted by the city) and two Birch trees planed by the original developer. All are deciduous so lose leaves in the winter but we'll give them full credit anyway, so call it 150 lbs of CO2 a year. My rooftop solar system nomin…

Valuable reasoned contribution. Bravo.

Of course, this reasoning is limited to carbon effects only. There are other important ecological concerns that trees might address that solar would not.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#273

Post by hyperbovine »

Flozzin wrote: post #270
mrec wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We even get visited by some beautiful red foxes from time to time It's funny how urban adaptation affects perceptions of rarity. I live in fairly-central London and you can hardly set foot outside after dark without tripping over a red fox or three. Out in the countryside they're still pretty wary (with reason, since farmers will shoot them). Are urban foxes a thing in the US too, or is this still a UK phenomenon?

I live in Minneapolis Minnesota. We have raccoons, opossums, squirrels, rabbits. That's all I have seen for small ground critters that aren't living in parks.

Skunks, there must be skunks. They are really thriving in (y)our neck of the woods due to milder winters.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#274

Post by piadodjanho »

IvanK_net wrote: post #153

I think we need a system, where the rest of the world will pay countries like Brazil or Indonesia to keep their current rainforests. Currently, we are paying them to cut down rainforests and plant oil palms, so that we can buy cheap oil from them.

In Brazil the deforestation in mostly for agricultural active and live stock. I'm curious to know how much the land would have to cost so the country made as much tax with the planted land as with other activities.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#275

Post by Maximus9000 »

ALittleLight wrote: post #97
jandrese wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's only 160 trees for every man, woman, and child on Earth... It doesn't seem like a particularly practical solution.

It seems incredibly practical to me. I've seen a quote for 40 dollars to plant a thousand trees. That's something like 50 billion to offset a decade of global warming? Doesn't sound so bad. Spread the cost out worldwide, 5 billion a year, split between a few big countries? http://forestandrange.org/southernpine/magement/planting/rea...

Is that just for the seedlings and not the actual labor of planting them?

I've seen quotes for parts of developing countries where planting trees would cost $100 USD per thousands trees.

See FAQ point #11: https://trees.org/faqs/

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#276

Post by Latty »

ed_balls wrote: post #114
ALittleLight wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems incredibly practical to me. I've seen a quote for 40 dollars to plant a thousand trees. That's something like 50 billion to offset a decade of global warming? Doesn't sound so bad. Spread the cost out worldwide, 5 billion a year, split between a few big countries? http://forestandrange.org/southernpine/magement/planting/rea...

I don't think planting trees is the biggest issue. Access to water is. More practical solution would be to fill some desert with sea water and grow plankton, kelp etc.

I recently saw a video about doing this - apparently the desert is actually a really bad option if we want to combat climate change - the core problem is that the desert currently reflects a lot of light from the sun. If we cover it with forest or whatever, then suddenly we adjust the albedo of the earth and absorb more heat, negating some of the impact. Combined with the energy need to pump (and desalinate for trees - your suggestion of kelp would presumably help there) water, etc... make it not really work.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfo8XHGFAIQ

I recommend watching the video - it explains it better and goes into detail - it cites its own sources.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#277

Post by ChuckMcM »

yathern wrote: post #234
ChuckMcM wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can tell you how I reason to it. According to many sources, but I will cite this one[1] a single tree converts about 50 lbs of CO2 in a year. There are three trees on my property, a city tree (planted by the city) and two Birch trees planed by the original developer. All are deciduous so lose leaves in the winter but we'll give them full credit anyway, so call it 150 lbs of CO2 a year. My rooftop solar system nomin…

Good reasoning! I agree with the basic premise - but I don't think you can ignore the CO2 cost to make a solar panel, vs to use one. A tree reduces CO2 as it's being 'built'. A solar panel requires many materials that are refined through various industrial processes - likely some of which produce CO2 - not withstanding the transportation CO2 cost. That all being said, I don't mean to disparage anyone who uses solar p…

Depends on whether or not you believe NREL, to wit:

An average U.S. household uses 830 kilowatt-hours of electricity per month. On average,producing 1000 kWh of electricity with solar power reduces emissions by nearly 8 pounds ofsulfur dioxide, 5 pounds of nitrogen oxides, and more than 1,400 pounds of carbon dioxide.During its projected 28 years of clean energy production, a rooftop system with 2-year paybackand meeting half of a household’s electricity use would avoid conventional electrical plantemissions of more than half a ton of sulfur dioxide, one-third a ton of nitrogen oxides, and 100tons of carbon dioxide. PV is clearly a wise energy investment with great environmental benefits! -- https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy99osti/24619.pdf

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#278

Post by duxup »

mrec wrote: post #226
duxup wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm fortunate enough to have a pond and some marshy area bordering my house. My neighbors sometimes wondered why I don't trim it up and make it look "nice" right up to the water like some folks do. I like it wild, lots of trees and wildlife. I even let the wildness take a bit more of the yard than when i moved in. A few big trees quickly sprung up, no maintenance (compared to a yard) it looks great wild. Perhaps if o…

> We even get visited by some beautiful red foxes from time to time It's funny how urban adaptation affects perceptions of rarity. I live in fairly-central London and you can hardly set foot outside after dark without tripping over a red fox or three. Out in the countryside they're still pretty wary (with reason, since farmers will shoot them). Are urban foxes a thing in the US too, or is this still a UK phenomenon?

I'm on the edge of the urban and rural suburban world so most wildlife is still a bit more wary, but yeah the urban foxes a few miles from me are far far less shy.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#279

Post by true_religion »

aj7 wrote: post #186

If the US share is 10%, that amounts to planting 40,000 trees per square mile over 3 million square miles. That is a square grid of trees, every 26 feet in X and Y, over 80% of the US landmass. Say what?

One tree every 26 feet is barely anything. Every suburban yard could support that instead of grass, and more rural environments would simply have actual forests.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#280

Post by rangibaby »

Panino wrote: post #46

A good way to take part in increasing the number of trees, if you own your own home, is to improve the state of your shade trees. The trees absorb atmospheric carbon while also reducing home temperatures in summer, which in turn reduces the electricity people use for cooling. (And you save money!!) So a shade tree is a particularly effective way to reduce both atmospheric CO2 and electric bills. You might think of sh…

My favorite ground cover is clover. It’s tough, adds nitrogen (free fertilizer!), bees love it, and it stops the sun from drying your soil out.
Post reply on HN