UKTC Archive

RE: The Pros and Cons of Planting Trees to Address Global Warming

Subject: RE: The Pros and Cons of Planting Trees to Address Global Warming
From: Rupert Baker
Date: Mar 24 2020 12:45:01
Well damn me...
Mind you that is only after 15 years; be interesting to know if the trend 
reverses as time goes on.
Thanks for the link Jerry - its good to have ones beliefs challenged!
Atb
Rupert

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info On Behalf Of Jerry Ross
Sent: 23 March 2020 17:35
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: Re: The Pros and Cons of Planting Trees to Address Global Warming



On 23/03/2020 17:06, Rupert Baker wrote:
"So much more can be achieved with Woodland"  Amen to that Jim! - leaving 
all the other benefits aside, woodland soils constitute large carbon sinks 
in their own right; much more so that grasslands with trees.
"Measurements of above ground carbon storage by the trees indicated that tree 
planting increased overall carbon storage, with the silvopastoral system 
predicted to achieve a higher level of carbon storage than equivalent areas 
of separate woodland and pasture."

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305846056_Soil_carbon_changes_after_establishing_woodland_and_agroforestry_trees_in_a_grazed_pasture


Atb
Rupert
PS one unintended consequence of the current pandemic may be the 
'neglect' of the '000s of Ha of mown grass, and its unintended 
conversion to something scrubbier and - eventually -woodland-like

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info On Behalf Of Jim Quaife
Sent: 23 March 2020 16:56
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: RE: The Pros and Cons of Planting Trees to Address Global 
Warming

There is always an exotic variety of our (very few) native trees that grow 
quicker, and the carbon sequestration argument is more to do with the live 
biomass of any tree, than necessarily to do with species.
The full range of the wider benefits of trees are now understood and having 
started life immersed in production forestry, now that instructions are 
exclusively to do with "non-production" woodlands, I can introduce a range 
of multiple uses when discussing objectives with clients.
I don't want to tread on any toes, but to my mind new woodland planting 
should aim to encompass as many reasonable uses as possible, and carbon 
sequestration is a handy by-product - important, but not the primary factor.
Even if one could work out different effectiveness of species, that surely 
should not be the main driver?
The vast numbers of trees the government wants to plant is one thing, but 
it is not, and should not be a matter of arithmetic.  So much more can be 
achieved with woodland.
Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 
[mailto:uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info] On Behalf Of 
oldoaktree@xxxxxxxxx.net
Sent: 23 March 2020 14:43
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: RE: The Pros and Cons of Planting Trees to Address Global 
Warming

When doing arcane art of estimating improvement to rooting area of trees by 
adding mulch, I find this to be quite useful.

"A tree of 1000mm diameter adds, on average, 103kg of dry mass each year in 
a northern temperate zone" – Nature  507-90-93 (2014).

You'll have to read the paper to get the ins and outs, but it does give a 
rough perspective of what a well mature tree is likely to put on.

Cheers

Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 
<uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> On Behalf Of Bill Anderson
Sent: 23 March 2020 13:11
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: Re: The Pros and Cons of Planting Trees to Address Global 
Warming

Confusing innit?
I seem to see plenty of elderly trees that don't seem to have appreciably 
increased in size during my lifetime. If they haven't increased in size it 
seems to follow that they've not sequestered much carbon. At the same time 
I've seen plenty of newly planted trees increase in size significantly, 
suggesting they've sequestered a lot of carbon. But it's possible I'm only 
seeing a very small part of the very big picture.
I need to read more, perhaps the virus will give me the time....
Bill.

On Mon, 23 Mar 2020 at 11:54, Jerry Ross <trees@xxxxxxxxxx.co.uk> wrote:

Bill -
" for most species mass growth rate increases continuously with tree 
size. Thus, large, old trees do not act simply as senescent carbon 
reservoirs but actively fix large amounts of carbon compared to 
smaller trees; at the extreme, a single big tree can add the same 
amount of carbon to the forest within a year as is contained in an 
entire mid-sized tree."
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature12914

Also,
"A recent study published in Nature
(https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0577-1 ) "Trade-offs 
using European forest to meet climate objectives" stated that, using 
existing climate models, there was almost zero positive impact on 
global climate whatever the proposed changes in forest management 
(including increasing forest area). Indeed the study found that any 
net increase in conifers made matters worse because conifer canopies 
absorb sunlight (the albedo
effort) so cancelling out the very small and temporary carbon capture 
by their photosynthesis. Indeed the study shows that forest 
conversion from conifer to broad-leaves has a positive impact, so 
restoration of coniferized native woodland can be justified on 
climate change grounds alone."
(Thanks to David Lovelace for that)

Wood pasture is the way to go.
Well actually, abandonment of all of the current widely adopted 
economic models is the way to go.


On 23/03/2020 11:19, Bill Anderson wrote:
This seems a reasonably well-balanced piece Wayne. The only thing 
that raises my hackles slightly is the reference to the benefits 
only arising when the trees are mature. I don't think this is 
completely correct. The Forestry Commission carbon lookup tables 
suggest that through a plantation's lifespan, the rate of greatest 
carbon sequestration is
between
years 5 and 30 (after planting). This seems to suggest we should 
manage
our
forests/woodlands to keep the average age of the individual trees 
relatively young. Their reference to maturity implies that they mean
older
than this, but perhaps I'm misinterpreting what they mean.
Bill.


On Sun, 22 Mar 2020 at 06:10, Wayne Tyson <wt750mv@xxxxxx.com> wrote:

https://www.ecowatch.com/planting-trees-climate-crisis-2645XXXXXX.h
tml

First, I confess to not having read beyond the article. However, I
believe
that your comments will be useful in broadening my understanding of 
the subject.

I look forward to your comments.

Wayne



--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy 
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/





--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy 
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/



--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy 
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/




--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy 
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/



--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy 
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/








--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy 
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/




-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/