Slashdot Mirror
Chainsaw-wielding Robotic Submarine
merryprankster writes "New Scientist is running a story about Sawfish, a chainsaw-wielding
robotic submarine used as an underwater lumberjack. There are some 200
million trees thought to be standing on the floor of hydropower reservoirs worldwide.
Sawfish attaches airbags to, and cuts around 9 trees an hour - the trees then float
to the surface for collection. Cue the jokes about robotic high heels, suspenders
and a bra."
The trees that have been in cold water the longest make some of the best wood in the world. Apparently, these was/is an effort to get some sunken wood from the bottom of Lake Superior that went down with logging ships long ago.
Great idea. Hope it's not one of the ugly big corporations that Michael hates so much that is doing it. And for god's sake, let's hope nobody actually makes an EVIL profit off of it. Right, Michael?
"If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
Found some pics here.
More here.
Triton Logging Company Engineering Page has a photo of what is presumably the Sawfish submarine.
/. needs a cancel feature)
(darn, I forgot to close a quote.
Test your net with Netalyzr
If you're gonna build a deck today, check out some of the composite materials that are available. I saw someone building once, was surprised that they could cut it with a saw, pound nails through it, etc, but that it was mostly plastic. I found one online, but I'm sure there are many others.
With the rapid depletion of old wood, it should be reserved for high-end furniture, instruments, etc. This is a fantastic alternative for outside use!
Sorry about the AC, but I'd rather not wait to get to my own system:
You obviously don't have the foggiest idea what you are talking about.
Old growth forrests around here are HUNDREDS of years old. Kind of hard to get that way due to 100 years of firefighting.
Also, this wood is in great shape if it is under enough water. You go deep enough, and it's pretty lifeless. I have a picture frame I made out of summerged old growth. It's some of the nicese stuff around.
It's a reference to the "I'm a lumberjack and I'm okay" routine by the Monty Python guys. :)
Check this page:
http://www.holysmoke.org/wb/wb0198.htm
Near the end.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
Old growth lumber is a decadent, unnatural forest, that is caused by man supressing forest fires for the last 100 years, which is nature's only way of renewing a forest, believe-it-or-not. Cones won't open, releasing seeds, unless under extreme heat.
... most old growth forests by definition are over a hundred and fifty years old, existing way before fire suppression. With your logic you can't explain the existence of all those 400 year old trees unless you have Native American firefighters.
Uh
Some trees do require fire for their cones to release their seeds, but there are many that don't. In fact, most trees in the Pacific Northwest don't (at least on the west side of the Cascades) - forest fires are extremely uncommon due to the wet climate.
Seattle was covered with old growth forest when the settlers arrived in the 1850s. That certainly was the natural state of the forests. There are only a few old growth trees left within the city.
Right, because after all, the U.S. Agriculture Department says America has 749 million acres of forestland. In 1920, we had 735 million acres of forest.
Only 7% of current U.S. forestland has been planted by man, so I suppose that only leaves 687 million acres of old growth forest. Yep, sure sounds like it's almost all gone.
The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
$1 per tree? You're kidding right? Go to a lumber yard some time and check out prices. Then remember this is cheap wood, taken from young trees. Old growth wood is quite rare since we've cut most of it down and done a poor job maintaining the forests (planting too many trees and putting out all the fires). So old growth wood fetches top dollar. Also, old growth trees are LARGE, and most of the wood is quality. You get a good yeild on them.
They'll be able to make plenty of profit per tree, probably over $100 each, after expenses.
this thing might just pay its own way. You'd be surprised at what woodworkers (in the US at least) will pay for old growth lumber, especially for hardwoods. Not to mention municipalties on rivers that want their shipping channels cleared out. I've seen people bid thousands of dollars for a single tree. Consider that a hundred years ago, it was not uncommon to see doors made out of a single slab of chestnut, for example; such things are incredibly rare these days.
C|N>K
Wood can stay preserved for thousands of years underwater. Take a look at this page which talks about the anaerobic deep water wrecks found in the black sea which was a large freshwater lake until a few thousand years ago. The flooding of that region is suspected to be the genesis of the biblical flood story (and of the Gilgamesh legend before it was co-opted by the Israelites) In particular look at the "mesolithic settlement" link where the same man that found the Titanic discovered a 7000 year old house which predates the epic flood and is very well preserved.
Liberals call everyone Nazis yet they are the closest thing to it.
"Can't argue with facts"
Nope, sure can't
Indecision is the key to flexibility.
This is not just "my logic", forestry is a science. Are you saying fire is not Mother Nature's main mechanism for renewing a forest? Are you saying 100 years of playing God with forest fire has not screwed up any ecosystems anywhere? Please elaborate. The US, in the past - maybe even still, had "Let Burn" policies (ie. Yellowstone) recognizing that fire suppression does indeed create unnatural forests.
Some trees do require fire for their cones to release their seeds, but there are many that don't.
Many that don't?? Many?? Such as?
To be fair, he's right to a limited extent. A cone soaked in a puddle or pond for extended periods will eventually sprout. A cone crushed by some force will also release it's seed. You can probably come up with other methods even. But Mother Nature designed forests for fire to be the main source of mass renewal.
Uh ... most old growth forests by definition are over a hundred and fifty years old
Most conifers don't even mature till about 100 years old, on average, and for most deciduous, it's more like 120-140 years, but it all depends on the species and their site conditions. Poplar, Aspen, etc. are considered hardwoods and yet can be mature after only 70-80 years. After reaching maturity, just like any other organism, you included, they begin to decay and it's all downhill after that.
With your logic you can't explain the existence of all those 400 year old trees unless you have Native American firefighters.
Again, its not just "my logic". Forestry is a science that's hundreds of years old. In North America, outside the unique ecosystem of the Pacific Northwest/Cascadia, where do trees live to 400 years? There's an area in the Niagara Escarpment where the acidic soils have created stunted, dwarf trees (eastern cedar, I believe)that can be 1000 years old, but this is certainly the exception and not the rule. Because they are not esthetically pleasing to the eye, no one except scientists really care.
In fact, most trees in the Pacific Northwest don't (at least on the west side of the Cascades) - forest fires are extremely uncommon due to the wet climate.
Look at a map of North America. Look how puny the "west side of Cascadia" is compared with North America. Your rebuttal is based on your knowledge of a small, unique ecosystem.
forest fires are extremely uncommon due to the wet climate.
Yeah, except I do live "on the west side of Cascadia" you speak of. I admit, it rains from November to March, but we couldn't light campfires all last summer as we could have caused a *gasp* forest fire, the bush was so dry. Thousands of people were evacuated from their homes "in Cascadia" last year, due to forest fires. Or don't you remember this? Care to wager it'll be the same again this summer?
I wonder what the buyers of expect to get per tree?
Look here or here.
My dad's a woodworker, and he's looked into buying some of the wood for it's overall quality, and some of its VERY unique graining and colouring.
The higher end wood was priced at over $1,000 per board foot (CDN), with the "cheap" high-end stuff being around $200 per board foot. When you consider that a single log (on average) has thousands of board feet in them, the profits are WAY more than $1 per tree!
I wish I could find the pics of some of the finished products, but if you go here you can see some of the graining of the recovered logs.
There was one 35 foot long board-room table I saw that was $120,000, and it LOOKED like it was worth every penny. It was incredible.
A lot of the local governments are starting to jump in and try and get ownership of the underwater resources, like in Michigan. There's SERIOUS money in it.
$0.02 (CDN)
I should also point out that hydroelectric reservoirs are, by definition, artificial habitats, and any fish adapting to them are, also by definition, an introduced species.
My brother and collected Christmas trees one year to dump in a pond we occasionally fished in. We had brim out the yazoo that summer.
Clark's Hill Reservoir, near where I grew up, has lots of submerged trees in it. When water levels fluctuate in the summer, boats collide with treetops where there shouldn't be treetops. Hopefully, this sort of work could make for safer lakes in the process.
This is not my sandwich.