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

41–50 of 332 posts

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

#41

Post by chongli »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #18
m0zg wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nor the emissions when those trees burn because they were planted in a place where waterbed can't support their density. This is happening in CA nearly every year.

> the emissions when those trees burn We'd probably have to sequester them somewhere anaerobic. Bottom of a deep-sea trench or underground. Which also reduces the net carbon footprint of the activity.

Why not do something more useful and sequester the trees in buildings? Timber-framed houses for everyone!

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

#42

Post by wolfspider »

cl0ckt0wer wrote: post #5

It doesn't look like they factored in the CO2 emissions from planting that many trees. The actual presentation: https://aaas.confex.com/aaas/2019/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/23744 Under a business-as-usual climate scenario our model suggests that warming would drive the loss of ~55 gigatons of carbon from the upper soil horizons by 2050. This value is around 12–17 per cent of the expected anthropogenic emissions over this p…

That’s a really good point also where water and irrigation is concerned hopefully that would be done in the most sustainable way possible. The idea of “offsets” unfortunately has been given a bad name politically due to unscrupulous actors. Really it could work if the public oversight was there in real time and all the facts on the table. Still, we are living in an age where efforts done “in everyone’s best interest” are a hard sell. We wouldn’t even be here if it weren’t easier to sell a pair of new shoes than clean air and water.

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

#43

Post by weberc2 »

EamonnMR wrote: post #33

This is a great illustration of how there is no hope of sequestration as a solution. We're unlikely to plant even just a billion trees.

Why do you suppose that is the case? Is the cost per tree too great? Are you pessimistic about lowering that cost via automation? I read recently about drones that can drop large numbers of pods containing fertilizer and seeds over a huge area in little time; it doesn’t seem infeasible to iterate on a concept like that and drive down the costs considerably.

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

#44

Post by weberc2 »

michelpp wrote: post #16
ai_ia wrote: post #7

I wonder if desert soil can be gradually converted to make the land fertile. That would definitely be helpful to convert a lot of land to plant trees which is currently of no particular use. Any research or innovation on that front ?

The soil is generally fine, the limiting factor is water. In Central Oregon's "Lake County" near where I live, 10-20k years ago was dense forest and thousands of deep clear water lakes. It's all desert now except for the "Lost Forest" near Christmas Valley. A fascinating enclave of ancient trees that somehow survive in the middle of the desert due to what is suspected to be an unusually shallow ground water system.

I’ve heard that a critical mass of trees can effectively generate their own moisture and counter desertification. No idea how this works or if it is true, but I’d love to be corrected and/or learn more.

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

#45

Post by brohee »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #37
adrianN wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best way for sequestering wood is turning it into biochar. You even get some energy out of it.

Doesn’t that release the captured carbon?

Not all of it, that's the point. Some pure carbon (charcoal) is left that makes good soil amendment. That carbon doesn't make it back to the atmosphere unless somehow burned.

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

#46

Post by Panino »

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 shade trees as cheap, biological solar panels.

Also, one can plant fruit trees in their yard. I put in 6 last fall and plan to put in another dozen in the next 2-3 weeks. Over the winter I added about 6 truck loads of wood chips to the yard to reduce water usage. (My general feeling at this point from working with the soil is that the wood chips reduce watering needs by at least 80% here. This is a form of xeriscaping, if you're interested.) With all this food growing in the coming years we'll be taking fewer trips to the grocery store while eating better. And probably giving away and trading a lot of food - we're already starting to trade for eggs from a friend, for example.

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

#47

Post by reaperducer »

wolfspider wrote: post #42
cl0ckt0wer wrote: post #5

It doesn't look like they factored in the CO2 emissions from planting that many trees. The actual presentation: https://aaas.confex.com/aaas/2019/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/23744 Under a business-as-usual climate scenario our model suggests that warming would drive the loss of ~55 gigatons of carbon from the upper soil horizons by 2050. This value is around 12–17 per cent of the expected anthropogenic emissions over this p…

That’s a really good point also where water and irrigation is concerned hopefully that would be done in the most sustainable way possible. The idea of “offsets” unfortunately has been given a bad name politically due to unscrupulous actors. Really it could work if the public oversight was there in real time and all the facts on the table. Still, we are living in an age where efforts done “in everyone’s best interest”…

That’s a really good point also where water and irrigation is concerned hopefully that would be done in the most sustainable way possible.

I wonder how many of those 1.2T trees could be accomplished without starting huge new forests or in places that require irrigation.

There are cities in places with ample rain that already have 1,000's of vacant lots. Ten trees per vacant lot could start to make a big difference, if only regionally.

Maybe Americans should stop thinking of Arbor Day and the Arbor Day Foundation as quaint square leftovers from a past generation, and start thinking of them as a framework to save the planet.

https://www.arborday.org

I'd welcome two new trees in my front yard and two in the back, but my HOA won't allow it. I've already reached my maximum vegetation allowance.

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

#48

Post by wolfspider »

hliyan wrote: post #12
ai_ia wrote: post #7

I wonder if desert soil can be gradually converted to make the land fertile. That would definitely be helpful to convert a lot of land to plant trees which is currently of no particular use. Any research or innovation on that front ?

Water would be a problem, although that could theoretically be solved with solar powered desalination. References: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert_greening

That’s a really good point also where water and irrigation is concerned hopefully that would be done in the most sustainable way possible.

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

#49

Post by TaylorAlexander »

brohee wrote: post #45
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn’t that release the captured carbon?

Not all of it, that's the point. Some pure carbon (charcoal) is left that makes good soil amendment. That carbon doesn't make it back to the atmosphere unless somehow burned.

But the comment said we could get energy out. Wouldn't we burn it to get energy?

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

#50

Post by agumonkey »

m0zg wrote: post #35
agumonkey wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nor the small emission from natural decay of dead wood That said it could also: - absorb some heat - create new wind / rain cycles - provides a lot of material (construction/furniture) to replace cement and plastics - kill millions of people of exhaustion from planting that many trees

Planting is something we know really well how to automate, though. Planting is the most tractable problem in this (hypothetical) solution. Also, more rain means more clouds, and this is something the current climate models can't really model accurately, believe it or not. There's not even "consensus" on whether clouds are beneficial or detrimental.

I can certainly understands we have modeling limits
Post reply on HN