On Mar 22, 1:15?pm, Earl wrote:
> "Jake" wrote innews:1174587713.291612.229890@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
>
>
> The issue of climax forests being essential for CO2 removal is
> another of those ecomyths that have no basis in reality.
>
> A mature forest will have zero net CO2 consumption.
> Photsynthesis removal is balanced by the decomposition of forest
> waste. No new trees are being produced. For a tree to grow you
> have to remove an old tree which then is subject to decay.
>
> The best CO2 removal using trees is in the cheap woodpulp
> industry. A tree is grown rapidly within 5 years, cut down (and
> a replacement planted), and converted to paper. The paper is
> then thrown away, and disappears into the landfill.
>
> The landfills do not allow decay. GarbageArcheologists in
> Phoenix searched the dumps and could read newspapers over 50
> years old
Lots of good information in this thread. My thanks to those who
answered my questions.
|