Home   |   Sci News   |   Discussion Forum   |   Books, Books, Books   |   Curiosity Shop
Discussion Forum
Science Talk
Discuss scientific conundrums with our band of bamboozled boffins.
Search
Custom Search
Sponsored Links
Science Shopping
Sci Shop
Peculiar and bizarre scientific stuff that you didn't even know existed and you don't need.
News And Research

Animal Kingdom

Biology

Climate Change

Environment

Evolution

Genetics

Humans

Mind & Brain

Prehistory

Health & Diet

Health Threats

Health & Environment

Health: From The Lab

Mental Health

Reproductive Health

Energy Alternatives

Chemistry

Computing & Electronics

Nanotechnology

Pimping Nature

Robotics & AI

Physics

Space


Science Books
Book Reviews
Rusty Rockets lists his all-time favorite science titles.
Archives
2009 2008 2007
2006 2005 2004
2003 2002 2001
2000 1999 1998
Discussion Archive
Feature Archive


2 August 2006
Pine Trees Not “Green”
by Kate Melville

Landowners in the southern United States who are planting pine plantations may be contributing to rising carbon dioxide levels, says a study from Ohio State University. The researchers said that while planting trees is generally considered to be environmentally beneficial, pine plantations are in fact not that helpful. This is because pine plantations don't retain carbon as well as hardwood or natural pine forests, said study co-author Brent Sohngen. He added that, rather than pine, landowners should be looking at other tree types if they wanted to lower carbon dioxide levels.

Sohngen's study, appearing in Ecological Economics, estimated that some 10 million acres (about the size of New Hampshire and Vermont) of mainly hardwood and natural pine forests will be chopped down to make way for pine plantations by 2030 in just three Southern states. That translates into roughly 700,000 tons more carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere annually, or 21 million tons over the 30-year period.

While 21 million tons may seem like a drop in the ocean compared to the 3 billion tons of carbon the U.S. emits annually, Sohngen is quick to point out that the model only included Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi; and that the results extrapolated to other states could mean that carbon dioxide emissions could be as much as four times higher. And the trend may be accelerating as it appears that pine plantation owners are now clearing more stands of hardwood trees and natural pines in order to cultivate plantations. Sohngen estimated that an area roughly the size of Los Angeles (about 333,600 acres) is converted to pine plantations each year.

Hardwood forests tend to store more carbon than pine plantations do because a hardwood forest has more organic matter - leaves, branches, roots, and a mix of tree species - than a pine plantation does, and more organic matter means more storage space for carbon. Natural pine stands, with a variety of plant and tree species growing in them, also have more organic matter than a carefully cultivated pine plantation.

Sohngen believes that owners of hardwood and natural pine forests should be encouraged to hold on to their stands, possibly with subsidies or carbon credits. Such subsidies would help close the gap between earnings from pine plantations and those from hardwood and natural pine stands. "Right now, landowners can make more money from pine than from hardwood stands," Sohngen said. "Historically, pine plantations are much more productive in terms of timber products. But maintaining hardwood and natural pine forests is an efficient way to store carbon. We can encourage landowners to hold on to these stands - and help reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere - by subsidizing their costs."

Source: Ohio State University


Home         All The News      Science Forum         Books, Books, Books         Curiosity Shop         About

The terms and conditions governing your use of this website.
Copyright © 1997 - 2009 Science a Go Go and its licensors. All rights reserved.