Slashdot Mirror
US Cities Lose Tree Cover Just When They Need It Most (scientificamerican.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: Scientific evidence that trees and green spaces are crucial to the well-being of people in urban areas has multiplied in recent decades. Conveniently, these findings have emerged just as Americans, already among the most urbanized people in the world, are increasingly choosing to live in cities. The problem -- partly as a result of that choice -- is that urban tree cover is now steadily declining across the U.S.
A study in the May issue of Urban Forestry & Urban Greening reports metropolitan areas are experiencing a net loss of about 36 million trees nationwide every year. That amounts to about 175,000 acres of tree cover, most of it in central city and suburban areas but also on the exurban fringes. This reduction, says lead author David Nowak of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), translates into an annual loss of about $96 million in benefits -- based, he says, on "only a few of the benefits that we know about." The economic calculation involves several such benefits that are relatively easy to express in dollar terms -- the capacity of trees to remove air pollution, sequester carbon, conserve energy by shading buildings and reduce power plant emissions.
A study in the May issue of Urban Forestry & Urban Greening reports metropolitan areas are experiencing a net loss of about 36 million trees nationwide every year. That amounts to about 175,000 acres of tree cover, most of it in central city and suburban areas but also on the exurban fringes. This reduction, says lead author David Nowak of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), translates into an annual loss of about $96 million in benefits -- based, he says, on "only a few of the benefits that we know about." The economic calculation involves several such benefits that are relatively easy to express in dollar terms -- the capacity of trees to remove air pollution, sequester carbon, conserve energy by shading buildings and reduce power plant emissions.
You know those colored bands, known as "rings", in wood? The ones that are created anew year after year? What do you think they're made of?
Now, consider that they'll often be roughly the same thickness on average each year. Each circle is larger than the one before, so it's layering on more circumference all the time. As long as the tree is still alive, it's adding more to the trunk alone.
I'll allow that some trees die fairly soon in human terms, but many do not. Still though, even alders or poplars are bigger each year for their relatively short, fast-growing lifespan.
Sorry,
No need to apologize, just provide a citation that supports your argument. Otherwise, you really are sorry. A sad, sorry sack. Now look what you did, you baited me into proving that you know jack about shit, and jack just left town.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"