Re:Phantom Forests: Why Ambitious Tree Planting Projects Are...
by Retric on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @12:10PM
(#33249620)
Monoculture of very fast growing trees let’s them maximize the value per acre when sold as carbon indulgences. Actual impact is much lower, but by then they have moved to the next project.
Re:Phantom Forests: Why Ambitious Tree Planting Projects Are...
by tomrod on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @12:16PM
(#33249725)
The economic topic you're hinting at is externality. There is also the notion of Goodhart's Law, where any (single dimensional) measure gets gamed.
Re:Phantom Forests: Why Ambitious Tree Planting Projects Are...
by jandrese on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @01:06PM
(#33250608)
Would it really be so hard to plant a mix of seeds? I can see a monoculture if the intention is to harvest the wood or fruit later, but if you're only planting to capture carbon or restore a forest then a mix of trees seems like a healthier option and shouldn't be any more effort. You don't need to be precise with the mix either, a just random chance should be fine.
A side effect is that you can end up with productive species. Imagine forests where many trees bear fruits, others have acorns that pigs can feed on, fruit vines and understory herbs that animals can graze on, large lakes with edible fish. This is the future I'd be excited for and it's all currently possible with the right policies.