SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ken Adams who wrote (125986)11/27/2009 8:28:31 AM
From: Selectric II2 Recommendations  Respond to of 206329
 
Even if they cut down an e.g. 100' tall tree with a 2' diameter trunk, that captures 48 lbs. of CO2 per year, they replace it with a 2' tall sapling with a pencil-thin trunk that captures __(?) ounces of CO2 per year and takes __ years to reach 100' and capture 48 lbs of CO2.

You're saying there's no net carbon capture difference, that it's only the gross number of trees that count?

If they planted full-size trees, you'd be right.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News