Re: [OT] The Huff calls B.S.!volcanic

Alex W <ingilt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 03 Jan 2011 14:34:55 -0600, Mickey wrote:


Speaking of confounders, let me roll another hand grenade into the
room. An "old-growth" forest, as opposed to one of those tree farms
Alex seems to hold in contempt, would generate *TONS* more methane
from decomposition of crap on the forest floor.

Methane is a far more effective greenhouse gas.

I don't hold tree farms in contempt -- matter of fact, I'm
invested in a forestry fund. Good business to be in. I
simply do not think the ecological (as opposed to economic)
arguments are quite as convincing as they are made out to
be. Decomposing "crap" is the stuff that makes trees grow,
and grow faster -- any hobby gardener with a composting heap
can confirm this.

That hand grenade is also not quite as devastating as you
believe, Mickey,

Well, I never said it was a big grenade. ;-)

as to some extent the process of
decomposition and methane generation is simply shifted from
the forest floor (where it actually does some good) to
rubbish dumps and landfill sites where the products made
from this wood eventually end up. In climate terms, whether
the methane is generated directly by a decomposing tree or
by a few thousand sheets of paper and an Ikea book-shelf is
really immaterial. It's a bit like the twits who preach the
advantages of "clean" electric cars without considering that
pollution is simply shifted from your car exhaust to the
nearest power station.

This bit about the electric cars is spot on, and an argument against
them that I've been making, literally for years.

What bothers me most isn't really "trees versus no trees" as
much as equating all trees. It's not all the same.
Monoculture plantations are thin, hardscrabble ecosystems
that would not exist or sometimes not even survive without
active human management. They are not really comparable to
a self-sustaining organically grown forest which provides
life and habitat to large varieties of plants and wildlife.
It's a bit like saying that a Nebraska wheatfield is the
same as a prairie simply because it is covered by grasses.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: [OT] The Huff calls B.S.!volcanic
    ... An "old-growth" forest, as opposed to one of those tree farms ... from decomposition of crap on the forest floor. ... Methane is a far more effective greenhouse gas. ... I don't hold tree farms in contempt -- matter of fact, ...
    (alt.smokers.cigars)
  • Re: [OT] The Huff calls B.S.!volcanic
    ... An "old-growth" forest, as opposed to one of those tree farms ... from decomposition of crap on the forest floor. ... Methane is a far more effective greenhouse gas. ... I don't hold tree farms in contempt -- matter of fact, ...
    (alt.smokers.cigars)
  • Re: [OT] The Huff calls B.S.!volcanic
    ... An "old-growth" forest, as opposed to one of those tree farms ... from decomposition of crap on the forest floor. ... Methane is a far more effective greenhouse gas. ... I don't hold tree farms in contempt -- matter of fact, ...
    (alt.smokers.cigars)
  • Re: [OT] The Huff calls B.S.!volcanic
    ... An "old-growth" forest, as opposed to one of those tree farms ... from decomposition of crap on the forest floor. ... Methane is a far more effective greenhouse gas. ... What bothers me most isn't really "trees versus no trees" as ...
    (alt.smokers.cigars)
  • Re: [OT] The Huff calls B.S.!volcanic
    ... keep-alive 1 ton of Douglass Fir as it does 1 ton of beech. ... tree or keeping old tree alive. ... An "old-growth" forest, as opposed to one of those tree farms ... Alex seems to hold in contempt, would generate *TONS* more methane ...
    (alt.smokers.cigars)