Cyclone Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 Are you saying that you aren't defending them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_the_m Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 Since the replacement trees are smaller species than ones being replaced, the long-term net effect is greater CO2 emissions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest makapaka Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 5 hours ago, dave_the_m said: Since the replacement trees are smaller species than ones being replaced, the long-term net effect is greater CO2 emissions. Greater CO2 emissions from what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_the_m Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 8 hours ago, makapaka said: Greater CO2 emissions from what? Suppose the mature tree being cut down weighs 100 tons, and its replacement, when fully grown. weighs 50 tons. Then in the long term replacing the tree with a smaller species will have released the carbon content of 50 tons of wood more than if the original tree had been left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 9 hours ago, makapaka said: Greater CO2 emissions from what? Lower CO2 absorption and lower O2 emission would be more accurate. 57 minutes ago, dave_the_m said: Suppose the mature tree being cut down weighs 100 tons, and its replacement, when fully grown. weighs 50 tons. Then in the long term replacing the tree with a smaller species will have released the carbon content of 50 tons of wood more than if the original tree had been left. Also that. But trees absorb CO2 and produce O2 even when not actively getting larger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest makapaka Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 4 hours ago, dave_the_m said: Suppose the mature tree being cut down weighs 100 tons, and its replacement, when fully grown. weighs 50 tons. Then in the long term replacing the tree with a smaller species will have released the carbon content of 50 tons of wood more than if the original tree had been left. What happens when the 100T tree dies and the replacement tree never existed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 That's still a terrible argument for removing mature trees for no good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_the_m Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 15 minutes ago, makapaka said: What happens when the 100T tree dies and the replacement tree never existed? When the 100T tree dies, I would hope that the council will plant a sapling that will in time grow to 100T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest makapaka Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 1 hour ago, Cyclone said: That's still a terrible argument for removing mature trees for no good reason. In isolation the argument would be yes. But in terms of the overall impact of replacing ornamental trees on inner city streets it should be considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 You are making that argument in isolation in an attempt to justify the tree felling that took place in order to make the contract cheaper for Amey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now