Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!auvm!VTVM1!CCCS
From: CCCS@VTVM1.BITNET (todd pukanecz)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Subject: (no subject given)
Message-ID: <90043.2158.CCCS@VTVM1>
Date: 12 Feb 90 21:58:39 GMT
Sender: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@UCF1VM>
Reply-To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@UCF1VM>
Lines: 24
Approved: NETNEWS@AUVM Gateway

>                                                        Also, it is
>the good old foresters and their young seedlings they plant that are better
>for the atmosphere.  Young trees remove much much more CO2 than old trees.
  NO!  I read an article about this over the weekend.  The idea that
young trees remove more CO2 is a fallacy, presumably perpetuated by the
lumber industry.
  Young saplings don't have nearly the capacity for storing carbon as
do the mature trees they replace.  (You don't need to be a botanist to
figure out that a large tree can store more carbon than a small one.)
Add to this that young trees don't grow as many leaves, where photo-
synthesis takes place, as do mature trees.  Young trees don't have the
equipment or capacity of mature trees for removing large amounts of CO2
from the atmosphere.
  It would take decades for young saplings to be mature enough to do
as much carbon processing as the old trees from the once abundant, indi-
genous forests which are being destroyed.  Deforestation is being done
by *private* companies with *government* consent.  Both sides are
responsible for this situation, and neither seems too keen on changing
the current course.

--------     /^^\    ---- Todd Pukanecz ----   ----  CCCS@VTVM1  ----
-----      /      >   --- Ag. Econ. DPL --- "I'm in a nuclear submarine
---  /\_ / @       \   -- Virginia Tech --   under the polar ice cap and
-  /________________>   - Blacksburg VA -    I need a Klenex." - ZIPPY