English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I have read the following statement : Research cites that a young, growing forest--following harvest operations--is much better for the environment than an old growth stand of trees. Actively growing trees between 20 and 70 years old have the ability to sequester carbon, whereas trees beyond that age are carbon neutral and even begin to release carbon into the atmosphere. (this is an industry report) The question is are these facts true, false, misleading, incomplete. Could you also list sources. Thanks.

2007-08-28 02:23:54 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Biology

2 answers

No source list. What they are basing the number of years on is the idea that after 70 years trees die and decay. Also that the topsoil has formed to its maximum depth so that decay and growth are balanced giving no more increase in the carbon content.
This argument ignores other features of old growth forests related to soils stabilization or to animal habitat. It also ignores the impact of cutting the older forest down to make the place for new forest.
This is an argument in favour of logging as being an environmentally friendly activity.
If the Carbon credits are counted using this argument continued forest depletion can be made to sound good. It might even be counted as an argument to allow more clear cutting.

Technically the facts are true but they are misleading and incomplete.

Corn captures more carbon in a year than a forest of equal size ever will. The thing is that corn is converted back in less than a year.
Lumber can be used as building material and the carbon is not released into the carbon cycle as fast for that material, however most wood products return to the carbon cycle fairly quickly so that you can consider allmost all of a lumbering operstion as increasiong the carbon loading. Especially when you count the energy used in the harvest and manufacturing.

2007-08-28 02:48:17 · answer #1 · answered by ? 5 · 2 0

Sure and what about the animals ?

Research of this type plays into the hands of lumber corporations.

2007-08-28 03:32:17 · answer #2 · answered by ag_iitkgp 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers