Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre
1–10 of 201 posts
Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre
#2I planted one of these trees a few years ago and I think it's absolutely gorgeous. I can't get over how absolutely huge the leaves get. A lot of people hate them though, for the same reason outlined in the article: you can't kill them. Many consider them weeds.
Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre
#3Any idea whether this is damaging/depleting for the soil because it is so fast-growing? If so, to what extent can the soil be artificially rejuvenated through fertilizers or other tools?
Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre
#4I think this is a neat idea but have one question. I'm not a chemist but am curious what happens to all that carbon after it's taken in by the tree. Does that carbon become something else? Or does it just kind of hang out in the tree until the tree dies? Once the tree dies, does all that carbon just go back to the atmosphere again? Thanks for any insight!
Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre
#5Forgive me, but it doesn't look like much. How can a tree with such a small mass contain more carbon than a massive tree with trunks and branches? They don't even seem to be very close together in those photos:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-08-02/we-alread...
Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre
#6Forgive me, but it doesn't look like much. How can a tree with such a small mass contain more carbon than a massive tree with trunks and branches? They don't even seem to be very close together in those photos: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-08-02/we-alread...
It's not about carbon per tree. It's about carbon per acre*year. Dense woods grow slowly so they take in very little carbon per year even though they grow very large. Fast growing trees are much better at quickly taking CO2 of the atmosphere.
Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre
#7I think this is a neat idea but have one question. I'm not a chemist but am curious what happens to all that carbon after it's taken in by the tree. Does that carbon become something else? Or does it just kind of hang out in the tree until the tree dies? Once the tree dies, does all that carbon just go back to the atmosphere again? Thanks for any insight!
It is part of the wood itself. Apparently wood is about half carbon. All known living things are made of carbon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood#Chemistry_of_wood https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon-based_life
Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre
#8I think this is a neat idea but have one question. I'm not a chemist but am curious what happens to all that carbon after it's taken in by the tree. Does that carbon become something else? Or does it just kind of hang out in the tree until the tree dies? Once the tree dies, does all that carbon just go back to the atmosphere again? Thanks for any insight!
The carbon becomes part of the wood of the tree.
After the tree dies, it would only go back into the atmosphere if the trunk was burned.
Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre
#9I think this is a neat idea but have one question. I'm not a chemist but am curious what happens to all that carbon after it's taken in by the tree. Does that carbon become something else? Or does it just kind of hang out in the tree until the tree dies? Once the tree dies, does all that carbon just go back to the atmosphere again? Thanks for any insight!
The carbon is essentially the entirety of the tree itself
Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre
#10I think this is a neat idea but have one question. I'm not a chemist but am curious what happens to all that carbon after it's taken in by the tree. Does that carbon become something else? Or does it just kind of hang out in the tree until the tree dies? Once the tree dies, does all that carbon just go back to the atmosphere again? Thanks for any insight!
[deleted]