Posted on 07/26/2017 6:58:39 PM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
Which Trees Offset Global Warming Best?
Some trees are better than others at absorbing carbon dioxide
by Earth Talk
Updated March 29, 2017
Trees are important tools in the fight to stave off global warming because they absorb and store the key greenhouse gas emitted by our cars and power plants, carbon dioxide (CO2), before it has a chance to reach the upper atmosphere where it can help trap heat around the Earth’s surface.
ALL PLANTS ABSORB CARBON DIOXIDE, BUT TREES ARE BEST
While all living plant matter absorbs CO2 as part of photosynthesis, trees process significantly more than smaller plants due to their large size and extensive root structures.
In essence, trees, as kings of the plant world, have much more “woody biomass” to store CO2 than smaller plants, and as a result, are considered nature’s most efficient “carbon sinks”.It is this characteristic which makes planting trees a form of climate change mitigation.
According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), tree species that grow quickly and live long are ideal carbon sinks. Unfortunately, these two attributes are usually mutually exclusive. Given the choice, foresters interested in maximizing the absorption and storage of CO2 (known as “carbon sequestration”) usually favor younger trees that grow more quickly than their older cohorts. However, slower growing trees can store much more carbon over their significantly longer lives.
See my #40. Grass & corn = similar analysis: The “reverse” side of the cycle happens quickly too, with little net gain over a year or less.
Correct answer? None of the above because there is no global warming. (Don’t ACCEPT THE PREMISE!)
Answer: Trees that are cut down to make a log cabin that lasts 300 years sitting on a stone foundation. No concrete(unless you mortar the stones), no drywall, no paint, no insulation.
Correct: You have to have the right tree species and the right growing conditions to get the “right” wood characteristics of correct and “even” density, damping, and stiffness (of the wood).
If the Russkis had such a resource in Siberia, I’m pretty sure they’d be using it. :-)
Actually, concrete is not as major a CO2 contributor as is often claimed, if one examines the entire cycle: Curing concreter absorbs CO2.
Granted, there is concrete in Hoover Dam that is still not “fully” cured. :-)
Your image lacks dinosaurs.
I cannot give the image credence without dinosaurs.
There’s a moon (of Saturn or Jupiter, I forget) and it is full of hydrocarbons.
Sadly, that moon also lacks dinosaurs for some reason.
I found your post (to quote Arte Johnson), verrrry interesting.
Only in CO, OR, WA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.