why we don't grow more trees to get rid of CO2 problem ?

Answer 1

We would need to grow tons and tons more--it would be way to expensive. I think most of the earths CO2 is actually absorbed by the ocean anways.

Answer 2

Probably because we're too busy cutting down the ones we already have ;-)

Planting trees is certainly part of the remedy to the CO2 problem; and in fact there are a number of companies and NGO's that are already involved in reducing net carbon emissions by planting trees. Unfortunately this is only a PR exercise in most places as there is little economic incentive to encourage companies to reduce emissions.

What is really required is a well-designed emissions trading scheme - companies would be allocated a certain quantity of carbon credits, then required to either offset their emissions by improving energy efficiency, using lower-emitting technologies and investing in emissions neutralisation (eg planting trees), or they would have to buy credits from other organisations; unused credits could likewise be sold. This would put an economic value on pollution and therefore add another incentive for companies to improve their environmental performance. That, combined with state and private investment in developing and rolling out new energy technologies, and more efficient transport and consumer infrastructure would go a long long way to solving the problem. Bringing an end to the destruction of third world forests (including the amazon) would help too.

It also should be noted that it's not just the planting of trees that's required - carbon harvested in trees would probably need to be buried deep underground to prevent it from returning to the carbon cycle - if the intent is to roll back some of the emissions already produced.

Answer 3

Because if we did then we would probably find out that they lead to an O2 overabundance problem which would cause global warming/cooling which would destroy the earth - so please send your check or credit card to "Friends of the Earth who are against too much oxygen". You would think more trees would be a simple solution wouldn't ya. It would make too much sense and maybe too easy to do and that would not fit in well with current political agendas on both sides of the issue.

Answer 4

As humans, we need to stimulate the growing of trees. Someone won a Nobel prize for doing that in Africa. Many of our sky scrapers can have roof top yard spaces, could be used for outdoor restaurants.

Answer 5

Not just trees but every plant that gets its food by the process of photosynthesis. All plants Even algae.

Answer 6

Because environmentalists would rather have governments institute high green taxes with a combination of policies to stagnate growth instead of pursuing actual remedies.

Answer 7

More grass might be a solution. It seems to me that the location rather than the quantity of photosynthesis is actually the problem.