Many more trees could be planted without encroaching on crop land or urban areas • Hacker News Board

Re: Many more trees could be planted without encroaching on crop land or urban areas

#91

Post by JudgeWapner » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 4:06 AM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #88

JudgeWapner wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some kind of beetle (or was it a fungus?) has killed off a mind boggling number of trees which may be a side-effect of fighting forest fires and the campaign against logging. higher tree density == easier for fungus to spread. this is why I don't automatically believe anything from the "enlightened" progressive camp. back in the 80's, it was "Stop the Big Bad Loggers! Save the Forest!". Now, had they responsibly th…

The huge tree die offs in the US have been from invasive species. A big recent one is the Emerald Ash Borer. Lack of evolved resistance and predators are the key factors.

how does firefighting play into that? there was no firefighting before the 20th century. now everytime there's smoke it's squashed immediately. that cannot be natural.

Re: Many more trees could be planted without encroaching on crop land or urban areas

#92

Post by Scoundreller » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 4:48 AM UTC

hristov wrote: post #32

lopmotr wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cutting for wood doesn't hurt since the carbon is still trapped in the wood. In fact it helps since they regrow new trees that sequester carbon faster in their early years than mature trees.

That is the superficial thinking but unfortunately it is not true. First when they cut trees, they do not haul in the branches and the leaves. There is no money in that. The branches and the leaves are all cut out and left in place with just the main trunk being hauled to the sawmill. The branches and the leaves then dry out and rot releasing their carbon. This means that big part of the trees mass (probably at least…

Dunno what kind of tree it is, but I do see tree plantations where each was clearly planted at the same time in a grid, and in a race to the sky, the trees don’t bother with outward branches much, just the ever rising canopy.

Re: Many more trees could be planted without encroaching on crop land or urban areas

#93

Post by aitchnyu » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 6:19 AM UTC

your-nanny wrote: post #36

I wonder about growing trees in regions losing permafrost from GW

I wonder about creating a new homeland from reclaimed permafrost for climate refugees from all over the world. Maldives is already saving up for one since 2009 and looking at India, Sri Lanka and Australia.

Re: Many more trees could be planted without encroaching on crop land or urban areas

#94

Post by aitchnyu » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 6:24 AM UTC

What do scientists say about alleged negatives about planting trees, like reduced reflectivity and slower disperal of fumes in cities? Do any of them still stand?

Re: Many more trees could be planted without encroaching on crop land or urban areas

#95

Post by m_mueller » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 6:59 AM UTC

jillesvangurp wrote: post #46

It can actually be better than this still. Cattle can be part of a solution to helping restore arid land where the soil has been destroyed by intensive farming and erosion. Healthy soil stores enormous amounts of biomass (aka carbon). Intensive farming has destroyed enormous amounts of land world-wide and turned it into desert, releasing lots of CO2 into the atmosphere. This is a reversible process and catlle is part…

Does this offset the methane produced by cattle?

Re: Many more trees could be planted without encroaching on crop land or urban areas

#96

Post by marak830 » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 7:01 AM UTC

m_mueller wrote: post #95

jillesvangurp wrote: post #46

It can actually be better than this still. Cattle can be part of a solution to helping restore arid land where the soil has been destroyed by intensive farming and erosion. Healthy soil stores enormous amounts of biomass (aka carbon). Intensive farming has destroyed enormous amounts of land world-wide and turned it into desert, releasing lots of CO2 into the atmosphere. This is a reversible process and catlle is part…

Does this offset the methane produced by cattle?

I'm sorry I don't have a link I'm on mobile, but there have been some studies recently that showed putting seaweed into their diet reduced the methan production by a lot (80% iirc).

How you would manage that with the above plan is beyond me though :-)

Re: Many more trees could be planted without encroaching on crop land or urban areas

#97

Post by jillesvangurp » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 7:56 AM UTC

m_mueller wrote: post #95

jillesvangurp wrote: post #46

It can actually be better than this still. Cattle can be part of a solution to helping restore arid land where the soil has been destroyed by intensive farming and erosion. Healthy soil stores enormous amounts of biomass (aka carbon). Intensive farming has destroyed enormous amounts of land world-wide and turned it into desert, releasing lots of CO2 into the atmosphere. This is a reversible process and catlle is part…

Does this offset the methane produced by cattle?

Yes; don't have a reference available but healthy soil mostly consists of biomass compared to arid land which is mostly sand. The process of returning arid land back to healthy soil involves a lot of carbon capture in the form of dead plants, bacteria, root systems, fungi, etc. I've heard numbers suggestion this can be 70-80% of the mass and it builds up over time to form deep layers.

Another issue is that N2O forms when urine and manure are mixed; which is common with intensive cattle farming. This happens a lot less when cattle is roaming around and instead this helps fertilize the land and stimulates growth; it's actually good for the land. So, compared to growing cattle indoors and feeding them with the wrong food that is typically also produced using intensive farming, there's a big difference.

Re: Many more trees could be planted without encroaching on crop land or urban areas

#98

Post by SideburnsOfDoom » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 8:04 AM UTC

wlib wrote: post #53

senorjazz wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this actually validated? Living in an area heavily deforested for cattle grazing, the cattle grazed land does not look like a healthy land. The cattle keep all plant life cut right back. Hot sun can easily access the soil drying it out, then when heavy rains come, the top soil all runs off the land. Land that is left without cattle fares better, land that is actively reforested and trees helped to get established…

I'm on my phone in the country side with slow internet so I cant look up a link, but if I remember correctly, you should search "Alan Savory TED Talk" on youtube for an introduction to the use of livestock to reclaim land. Essentially, the issue with most livestock grazing is that it does not mimic natural grazing, which is a seasonal, high volume, high density event where the herd moves on and allows the grazed area…

> Alan Savory TED Talk

I'm no expert, but I would approach this with extreme caution. There are a lot of replies that he is "misleading", "wrong", "dead wrong" etc.

Re: Many more trees could be planted without encroaching on crop land or urban areas

#99

Post by CalRobert » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 9:00 AM UTC

solstice wrote: post #80

raphaelj wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's really interesting. According to this [1], a 10 years old `Calliandra calothyrsus` such as the ones they (trees.org) plant captures about 170 kg / 380 lbs of CO2. According to the World Bank [2], the average European citizen produces 6 tons of CO2 while the average American produces about 16 tons. That would mean that they can offset the yearly CO2 emissions of an European or American person by planting 35 ($3…

That's true but only half the picture: every time one of these trees dies it is cut down it needs to be buried or otherwise prevented from releasing the CO2 back into the atmosphere. The tree you mentioned is described on Wikipedia as follows: "...This tree grows to about 6 m and has pinnate compound leaves and flowers with a boss of prominent reddish-purple stamens. It is not very drought-tolerant and the above-grou…

We could get back to timber-frame buildings I suppose. If nothing else, woodworking is great fun.

Re: Many more trees could be planted without encroaching on crop land or urban areas

#100

Post by CalRobert » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 9:08 AM UTC

Retric wrote: post #42

jwr wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Economists widely agree that carbon pricing is the most effective way to fix climate change That is true, and does not conflict with the findings of the article. I think the difference here is that we can start planting trees right now. Carbon taxation is something people still pretend doesn't have to be done. It's also worth noting, that given the accelerating pace of the climate crisis, the time to start planting…

Most people are overestimating the value in planting trees. Trees readily plant themselves in areas they are well adapted to. Areas that don’t quickly turn into forests are generally poorly suited to growing trees. Further, not all trees are equivalent with marginal areas generally resulting in small and often very slowly growing trees.

Yes, over hundreds of years. I have a few acres of land and there's several trees on ~.5 acres. There's some young trees in the ground spreading from the original half acre that got there naturally. They're a good 4-5 feet from the original tree.

It'll take a while to get the rest forested if I wait, though squirrels and birds moving seeds could help. Part of it is that trees can make the area better for other trees; the conifers stop grass from growing under them, which is good since the grass can be as tall as I am and block out light.