🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <93nhuk$pop$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,  <dwheeler@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <93msl3$hdm@llama.swcp.com>,
>The reason the lumber industry likes evergreens is that they concentrate
>biomass into one relatively straight stem. Many of the largest softwoods
>also are the largest known trees in the world: Coastal redwood, Giant
>sequoia, Ponderosa pine, Sugar pine, Douglas fir, etc.

>Deciduous trees tend to grow wide and squat rather than tall and massive.
>That's why the majority of climax forest trees are evergreen rather than
>deciduous. This fact was noted over 100 years ago by the first head of
>the Forest Service, Gifford Pinchot from research done in the Black
>Forest of Germany.

I need to overcome the bias in my thinking.  "Flowering plants are superior,
and these conifirs are more primitive."  If they have survived and are
the climax forest then who are we to judge them.

>The thing that doesn't make sense is the alledged "research" you mention
>above. Evergreens live far longer than hardwoods, and degradation of
>their biomass requires considerably longer than hardwoods, which
>logically results in a longer carbon sequestration than from hardwoods.

>Until such work is cited and can go through the review process, I would
>be extremely leery of it.

I was encouraged by the research, because I thought it meant there was
another idea for something we could do, and helped explain the northern
temperatures that were higher than expected from the early climate
models.                          -- Martin
-- 
Personal, not work info:         Martin E. Lewitt             My opinions are
Domain: lewitt@swcp.com          P.O. Box 729                 my own, not my
Hm phone:  (505) 281-3248        Sandia Park, NM 87047-0729   employer's.