Re:$100M xPrize for Carbon Removal
by burgessaccount on Tuesday July 13, 2021 @06:00PM
(#27826812)
A few other problems - 1) trees take a lot of water to grow, and 2) all the carbon they sequester can go right back into the atmosphere in a forest fire. Some very scrupulous carbon-offset companies (like YC co terraformation!) are careful to plant diverse, native species in a way that rebuilds habitat and fits local water supplies. But there are a huge number of irresponsible tree-planting orgs that plant monoculture trees in places they don’t belong. For instance, eucalyptus trees in California - an invasive species that sucks water out of the ground, then burns up like an oil rag
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Trees take a lot of water to grow but they also hold water and share it through the air and ground with other plants and with other creatures in the form of transpired water vapor.
Re:$100M xPrize for Carbon Removal
by burgessaccount on Tuesday July 13, 2021 @08:32PM
(#27827997)
Definitely true! I am a huge fan of trees. But the wrong tree in the wrong place is a bad thing. I try to advocate for responsible and thoughtful reforestation - which is, unfortunately, a lot more expensive than people want it to be.
Where can I learn more about the costs and challenges of thoughtful reforestation, and the key differences between the responsible and irresponsible sort? (Just popping in to ask because it seems like you might know). I'm interested in doing some work in this space but don't have any background.
Re:$100M xPrize for Carbon Removal
by burgessaccount on Wednesday July 14, 2021 @09:00AM
(#27832523)
Hmm… can’t point to one specific book, but there are lots of links. You can google “reforestation monoculture” and “reforestation native species.” This article is a great place to start: https://e360.yale.edu/features/why-green-pledges-will-not-cr...
It doesn’t get into the granularity of the costs, but highlights that the basic issue is countries are still hoping to make a profit off these “carbon sinks” by planting easily usable timber - aka monoculture - which greatly diminishes the benefits of forests and leaves them vulnerable to blights and other disasters.
Thank you very much!
Trees rarely burn to the ground in a wildfire. Their foliage burns quickly and the bark chars, but it takes years for even trees in the hottest spots to finally fall and then, many more years to decompose back into the soil.
This depends on the health of the tree. The bark beetle has decimated many pine trees in the sierra nevadas, leaving many trees standing but actually sick or dead, and unable to resist a forest fire.