If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   And thus began the conquest of six countries by the invasive giant redwood army, leaving skeletons of kangaroos a hundred feet in the air   (usatoday.com) divider line 80
    More: Strange, sequoia, reforestation, Crescent City, planting, skeletons, SSTs, whales, trees  
•       •       •

13569 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Apr 2013 at 2:19 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



80 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-22 06:54:13 PM

Plant Rights Activist: 18" trees?  What is this?  A forest for ants?


So they can be trampled by dwarfs?
 
2013-04-22 07:29:23 PM

Oldiron_79: Plant Rights Activist: 18" trees?  What is this?  A forest for ants?

So they can be trampled by dwarfs?


Spinal tap was in charge of the project.
 
2013-04-22 07:31:45 PM
how 'bout we start exporting these babies?

img.groundspeak.com
 
2013-04-22 07:46:12 PM

maxheck: Rotting trees give up almost all the carbon they sequestered. A pine tree might sequester carbon for ~70 years, fall over, and give it all back in 10. A sequoia might start slow, but would gather carbon at an increasing rate and hold on to it for 1000+ years.


Or bear with me -- we plant 2000 pine trees, and log them out a dozen times over those thousand years.

If you really want a carbon sink you want muskeg. The natural cycle of small wetland areas being perpetuated by beavers and the slow succession filling in of those ponds just packs carbon into the ground. Huge black spruce forests might only grow to heights of 20 feet -- but their environment is highly acidic and the ground is very wet and the trees dont rot away as much as they are consumed by the moss and shiat living there. Everything falls and keeps growing upon itself and the peat can reach depths of 100 feet.

100 feet of compacted forest compost holds an awful lot of carbon.

Muskeg is a huge carbon sink. Its good stuff. Sphagnum Moss is super boss. And its weird sexual reproduction is super interesting to read about.
 
2013-04-22 08:01:14 PM

mikefinch: maxheck: Rotting trees give up almost all the carbon they sequestered. A pine tree might sequester carbon for ~70 years, fall over, and give it all back in 10. A sequoia might start slow, but would gather carbon at an increasing rate and hold on to it for 1000+ years.

Or bear with me -- we plant 2000 pine trees, and log them out a dozen times over those thousand years.

If you really want a carbon sink you want muskeg. The natural cycle of small wetland areas being perpetuated by beavers and the slow succession filling in of those ponds just packs carbon into the ground. Huge black spruce forests might only grow to heights of 20 feet -- but their environment is highly acidic and the ground is very wet and the trees dont rot away as much as they are consumed by the moss and shiat living there. Everything falls and keeps growing upon itself and the peat can reach depths of 100 feet.

100 feet of compacted forest compost holds an awful lot of carbon.

Muskeg is a huge carbon sink. Its good stuff. Sphagnum Moss is super boss. And its weird sexual reproduction is super interesting to read about.


And then, we can drain the swamp, mine out the peat and burn it for fuel!  Er.. nevermind.
 
2013-04-22 08:12:00 PM
mikefinch:

maxheck: Rotting trees give up almost all the carbon they sequestered. A pine tree might sequester carbon for ~70 years, fall over, and give it all back in 10. A sequoia might start slow, but would gather carbon at an increasing rate and hold on to it for 1000+ years.

Or bear with me -- we plant 2000 pine trees, and log them out a dozen times over those thousand years.


Log them out for what? Toilet and news paper? Then you're just cycling it just as fast as it soaks up carbon. That was kinda my point... Durable structural lumber is a carbon sink.

Though I don't know if I'd trust pine lumber to last more than 5-6 decades even in a house.
 
2013-04-22 08:22:57 PM

Erix: And then, we can drain the swamp, mine out the peat and burn it for fuel! Er.. nevermind.


Hey man -- if you can make draining muskeg and mining the peat economical then go for it...

Draining alone would be an enormous peat feat. (HA!) The water table in those places is usually about a foot below ground and the ground is porous and spongy...

Its not a fun place. The bugs. The mosquitos. Standing water as far as the eye can see and you are the only human for those bastards to chase. And the horse flies that eat chunks of your flesh.

Expensive and gross. Its like the place the earth designated as 'no development allowed' and it reinforced that with ground made of pudding and trees that are so thick you cant walk through them without crawling and squirming about...

Black fly little black fly
Always the black fly no matter where i go
I'll die with the black fly pickin my bones
In north Ontario-io in north Ontario...
 
2013-04-22 08:33:43 PM
I want to see some enterprising soul in the S.E. US give Sal trees a try.
 
2013-04-22 08:35:08 PM

maxheck: Log them out for what? Toilet and news paper? Then you're just cycling it just as fast as it soaks up carbon. That was kinda my point... Durable structural lumber is a carbon sink.


You could always take huge loads of crap lumber out into the deep ocean and sink it into a trench... The Japanese have been doing that to preserve really nice west coast cedar for years now. But then the Japanese pay disgusting amounts of money for trees. They buy all the nice lumber from Canada and they sink some of it to the ocean floor to preserve it for later or to wait until its worth more. I'm sure we could do that with cruddy lumber thats just grown for the carbon...

And pine lumber is just fine. Its no white spruce or douglas fir but it has its uses.
 
2013-04-22 08:35:47 PM
I thought sequestration was bad.
 
2013-04-22 09:11:58 PM
Why do you need to clone a redwood, when there are saplings all over the place?
 
2013-04-22 10:06:01 PM

maxheck: In fact, the best balance might be: plant a bunch of useful, fast growing wood that you can build lasting structures out of, prevent the wood from rotting and get some use out of it at the same time.


When I'm feeling droll I figure that we could grow junk trees, make charcoal out of them (generating electricity from the heat of pyrolysis), then bury that charcoal (pure carbon) in abandoned coal mines.
 
2013-04-22 10:07:04 PM

stuffy: Why do you need to clone a redwood, when there are saplings all over the place?


They want to propagate the genetic superiority of exceptionally long-lived specimens.
 
2013-04-22 10:31:53 PM
theorellior:

maxheck: In fact, the best balance might be: plant a bunch of useful, fast growing wood that you can build lasting structures out of, prevent the wood from rotting and get some use out of it at the same time.

When I'm feeling droll I figure that we could grow junk trees, make charcoal out of them (generating electricity from the heat of pyrolysis), then bury that charcoal (pure carbon) in abandoned coal mines.


I'm pretty sure that making charcoal releases things nastier than CO2... In my high-school days I had a forge, and I used to roast wood in a (mostly) closed drum to make the next session's charcoal. I'm no chemist, but I'm pretty sure there was a lot of carbon monoxide invoved.

Burying stuff is fine so long as there's no water. Once you have water, mold, bacteria, fungus, whatever it starts digesting cellulose and burping CO2.

Even in the most immense coal or salt mines... How much cornstalks and wheat chaff and (per your example) junk tree can you stuff in those? (and look at Yucca Mountain's success!) I don't think they could keep up with the demand of more than a year.
 
2013-04-22 10:45:26 PM
Cool.
 
2013-04-22 11:23:57 PM

maxheck: I'm pretty sure that making charcoal releases things nastier than CO2... In my high-school days I had a forge, and I used to roast wood in a (mostly) closed drum to make the next session's charcoal. I'm no chemist, but I'm pretty sure there was a lot of carbon monoxide invoved.


Carbon monoxide, methanol, acetone, acetic acid, from memory... hah, just looked it up, and those (with CO2 and water) are most of the main volatile products. I missed methane. It also leaves tar (soluble and insoluble), which has cresols and who knows what else.

Thing is, you can burn those products. Sure, that's a bit more carbon that you're re-releasing instead of CO2 instead of sequestering it -- but way more than half is still ending up as stable, non-biodegradeable charcoal.

Because, as you pointed out, biodegradation does mean (approximately, in the end) "conversion to CO2". But that's not what happens to charcoal, even when there's water. I don't think anything really eats actual elemental carbon.

As for the relative size of mines, to a first approximation, the stuff we've burned to get ourselves into this mess has come from those mines; in principle, putting it back in until they're filled to capacity should undo most of the concentration increase. Unfortunately, that neglects all the mountaintop-removal and strip mining. Building mountains back up from charcoal probably wouldn't produce quite so stable an end result as filling in underground mines.
 
2013-04-22 11:40:41 PM

ladyfortuna: WelldeadLink: ruta: Frankly I'm amazed that they've got permission to plant these in some of the countries mentioned where they have incredibly tight restrictions on non-native species.

The article did not mention anything about getting permission.
They're going to do good, whether it kills someone or not.

I'm all for planting trees, but for cryin' out loud, plant the stuff that's supposed to grow there in the first place... and ask permission first, or someone's just going to come along and rip it out anyway.


Yup.  Assholes like these guys introduced iceplant and other invasives to Southern California, where they have choked out the native plants and done Bad Things to the soil quality.  People who don't know what's going on just see that stuff and think "well, it's something green that keeps the soil in place".  They're wrong.

/at least the redwoods aren't exactly going to grow out of control
 
2013-04-22 11:57:39 PM
Step 1 : Find an empty planet

Step 2 : Plant a whole bloody lot of giant redwoods

Step 3 : Name it Kashyyyk and build a bunch of treehouses.
 
2013-04-23 12:19:58 AM

dryknife: I think that most of the redwoods in northern California are second growth trees except for isolated areas like Muir Woods.


The woods seem pretty wiped out now. Googling the forest will make you sick.

I think redwoods are the ones that grow up from the roots of their parent tree. I'm thinking in old forest you can see remnants of the old parents and the younger trees march out in all directions and form a circle of redwoods.
 
2013-04-23 12:23:55 AM
Came here for skeletons of kangaroos a hundred feet in the air.
 
2013-04-23 12:58:38 AM

StokeyBob: Came here for skeletons of kangaroos a hundred feet in the air.


This ^

Also:
They are spreading a species THAT GROWS SLOW AS HELL AND IS MONOLITHIC WHEN MATURED far outside their normal habitat - what is the problem?  If they actually become any sort of threat, it isn't as though it would be that hard to just chop them down again.  In terms of environmental damage there probably isn't a species less risky.  Hell, they probably won't even grow all that well to begin with, and they even say will surely die if not maintained.

So... not seeing the problem.
 
2013-04-23 03:32:27 AM
I love Sequioas and Redwoods, but, I would rather that they cloned Lebanese Cedars.
 
2013-04-23 07:15:49 AM
mikefinch:  Sphagnum Moss is super boss. And its weird sexual reproduction is super interesting to read about.


Worthless without pictures.
 
2013-04-23 10:01:26 AM

mikefinch: Erix: And then, we can drain the swamp, mine out the peat and burn it for fuel! Er.. nevermind.

Hey man -- if you can make draining muskeg and mining the peat economical then go for it...

Draining alone would be an enormous peat feat. (HA!) The water table in those places is usually about a foot below ground and the ground is porous and spongy...

Its not a fun place. The bugs. The mosquitos. Standing water as far as the eye can see and you are the only human for those bastards to chase. And the horse flies that eat chunks of your flesh.

Expensive and gross. Its like the place the earth designated as 'no development allowed' and it reinforced that with ground made of pudding and trees that are so thick you cant walk through them without crawling and squirming about...

Black fly little black fly
Always the black fly no matter where i go
I'll die with the black fly pickin my bones
In north Ontario-io in north Ontario...


I had a teacher that told stories of his youth helping to build railways up north, and how things like back-hoes would occasionally be lost by sinking into the muskeg. Also, I remember driving through there with my family about twenty years ago. I gave blood in Bankroft.
 
2013-04-23 11:01:52 AM
Does anybody know whether gorillas in redwoods can survive the winter?
 
2013-04-23 11:30:13 AM

maxheck: I'm pretty sure that making charcoal releases things nastier than CO2... In my high-school days I had a forge, and I used to roast wood in a (mostly) closed drum to make the next session's charcoal. I'm no chemist, but I'm pretty sure there was a lot of carbon monoxide invoved.


That sounds like the sweet sweet smell of syngas.
 
2013-04-23 12:29:22 PM

theorellior: stuffy: Why do you need to clone a redwood, when there are saplings all over the place?

They want to propagate the genetic superiority of exceptionally long-lived specimens.


So those cloned saplings will do great if they're planted in a place with the exact same conditions that their parent was.  Since that doesn't really exist, they should have just gone for a random assortment of saplings, in the hopes that some will be well suited for the new location.
 
2013-04-23 01:34:12 PM

mutterfark: Shouldn't they use baobabs?


What a little prince!
 
2013-04-23 02:29:50 PM

Erix: So those cloned saplings will do great if they're planted in a place with the exact same conditions that their parent was. Since that doesn't really exist, they should have just gone for a random assortment of saplings, in the hopes that some will be well suited for the new location.


Shhhh... the news will only sadden them.
 
2013-04-23 06:14:49 PM

Erix: Since that doesn't really exist, they should have just gone for a random assortment of saplings, in the hopes that some will be well suited for the new location.


Or... and stay with me here... native trees from the area. I know, I know, it's crazy, but sometimes it's gotta be!
 
Displayed 30 of 80 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report