31–40 of 139 posts
It's a reason why those "we plant a tree every time you buy X" marketing claims are mostly BS.
Much of the Earth's surface is not suitable for growing trees, either because it's too dry, to wet, to cold, poor soil or lack of soil, etc. The article gives examples of planting in places where trees don't typically grow, on coastlines and in deserts, so it's not at all surprising that the trees planted there died. This is why I've always been skeptical of tree planting initiatives. In areas where they can survive,…
I don't know how feasible it is, but using trees to transform parched landscapes is the mission of a company I interviewed at a while back called Terraformation, founded by the former CEO of Reddit.
Monocultures of any kind are always fragile, you need diversity to have a resilient ecosystem. These projects should benefit from an understanding of permaculture, which is a discipline that aims to create the right conditions for healthy systems. Everything from succession (pioneer leguminous species that can fix nitrogen and improve soil, slowly replaced by other species), trying to slow down and catch water where…
and what about grasslands? these projects will sometimes plant forests that were historically savanna and grasslands
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yes, LA has a program to give away trees for planting in yards and parkways, and my read of the program is that, while it's goal is laudable, the implementation is lacking. earlier this year, a partner non-profit planted 2 trees for us and i planted an additional 2 trees that another org gave us, and i learned that it's not a set-it-and-forget-it type of endeavor. walking around my neighborhood, many of these trees,…
Also, even native plants aren’t adapted to what many people consider ‘native soil’ - if there is no existing native vegetation, the soil itself is far different from what a typical seed would deal with from that same plant natively. And when you think about it, it’s normal - you’d never end up with a giant 100% consistent group of plants in a native area anyway. You’d have variable concentrations all over the place,…
The Miyawaki method [1], which I'm sure has been on HN before, is a very different approach to these projects. When I first read about it, it seemed like a kind of too-good-to-be-true miracle approach, but reading further it's really just a lot of hard work. Site preparation is a huge part of it. This photo gallery [2] gives some sense. It starts with soil testing and soil amendment, I doubt they ever consider the so…
> I do wonder what tools could support this kind of higher-effort higher-impact forestation What's neat is that the tools already exist. Much of modern farming is a data problem- knowing soil conditions and nutrient levels across a large area and which plants would work best where. They often make use of satellite data, watershed simulation, weather and climate models. I wonder if anyone has documented using those to…
As the article points out, the problem is our obsession with "trees planted" instead of "trees survived" after n years (n=20? not sure, but at least 10). It's a reason why those "we plant a tree every time you buy X" marketing claims are mostly BS.
Much of the Earth's surface is not suitable for growing trees, either because it's too dry, to wet, to cold, poor soil or lack of soil, etc. The article gives examples of planting in places where trees don't typically grow, on coastlines and in deserts, so it's not at all surprising that the trees planted there died. This is why I've always been skeptical of tree planting initiatives. In areas where they can survive,…
Some would argue that where conditions for trees aren't suitable, the solution is to build a forest there. Forests themselves are the best terraforming tool, if you can get them started by supplying the necessary nutrients, energy, and water. I don't know how feasible it is, but using trees to transform parched landscapes is the mission of a company I interviewed at a while back called Terraformation, founded by the…
The problem is with the incentives. We reward organizations for planting trees when we should be rewarding them for growing trees. Anecdotally, paper mills don't seem to have a problem successfully growing monocrop forests on their own properties because they actually have a reason to care about the success of replanting their own land.
I have plenty of incentive to keep the trees in my own yard from dying, yet I lack the expertise. So they die. I need an arborist. Unfortunately the arborists in my town are incentivized to get me to pay their company to cut my trees down and replace them with new ones every 10-15 years or so. We really just need more foresters, with a broader mission that extends beyond simply government-owned park land, who can hel…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yes, LA has a program to give away trees for planting in yards and parkways, and my read of the program is that, while it's goal is laudable, the implementation is lacking. earlier this year, a partner non-profit planted 2 trees for us and i planted an additional 2 trees that another org gave us, and i learned that it's not a set-it-and-forget-it type of endeavor. walking around my neighborhood, many of these trees,…
Also, even native plants aren’t adapted to what many people consider ‘native soil’ - if there is no existing native vegetation, the soil itself is far different from what a typical seed would deal with from that same plant natively. And when you think about it, it’s normal - you’d never end up with a giant 100% consistent group of plants in a native area anyway. You’d have variable concentrations all over the place,…