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.
With the emerging (but still very small) movement to add a lot of plants to the roofs / sides of buildings, I would like to see a study making a quantitative evaluation as to how much said plants can compensate for the loss of trees.
(((dB)))
Dutch Elm Disease.
On a positive note, that's an addition of 175,000 acres per year that are NOT susceptible to forest fires!
What is the "just when they need it most" part? Is there a sudden, unforeseen shortage of firewood or lumber in the cities?
I'm guessing the submitter must've been recently watching one of those movies where the hero's gun jams just as the bad guy comes around the corner with his own gun drawn.
#DeleteChrome
This is one reason why I never left Canada. You have to move certain places to find it, but you can still find an affordable house on a well-treed lot, 20-30 minutes away from work here.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
fuck trees, they don't pay rent on my property so they can go ahead and die
To each their own.. Personally I'm growing some really nice Live Oaks in the front yard and a couple of Pecan's in the back. Over the last 10 years they've been growing quite well.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
As mentioned by others, trees can get sick and die. But, government agencies can (and usually do) over-react to finding any sign of disease or insect attack, and wipe out entire species from any area that MIGHT be affected. Find a particular beetle in a trap? All trees of that type within 500' are cut down within a week.
One of the local colleges planted a lot of fast-growing trees around campus at the turn of the 21st century, as they expanded the "green spaces". Virtually all of those trees are gone now, replaced with "decorative prairie grass", because they chose the WRONG fast-growing trees.
I guess you weren't in Shanghai or Beijing (especially Beijing).
This NYer was appalled at the lack of trees and green space.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
I don't believe it's a choice in the direct sense, but rather an economic reality. To be competitive globally and against automation requires high collaboration among experts and specialists. You mostly find this in populated areas.
Farming automation has reduced the need for rural workers, and mining automation is also ramping up.
If your job allows you to do remote work, then it more likely can be outsourced to Timbuktu for 1/3 your wages.
Table-ized A.I.
Here in Miami after Hurricane Irma I saw a LOT of trees being cut down that only had minor damage (maybe a branch or two down) from the hurricane. People would rather get rid of the whole tree rather than trim it back so it can recover after the storm.
It was extremely depressing as my part of the city is already lacking in tree cover and this hacking and slashing just made it worse. So many people just don't care. One house in particular used to be almost completely shaded in the afternoons but is now in the sun the entire day. I bet their cooling bills will be far higher this summer!
Trees are bad for capitalism! Why have space- and resource-wasting nonsense like TREES when you could pave over that space and charge people to park their cars there? Or get rid of that completely useless public park and put up another high-rise office building, or better yet, luxury 'loft' spaces to lease out to rich people for HUGE profits?
..yeah, sure. Just pave over the whole gods-be-damned country, especially with someone occupying the Whitehouse who wants to open up National Parks to oil drilling and 'development'. Natural spaces? Natural beauty? LOL what do we need that for when it can make more MONEY? MONEY is the only GREEN you should want in your life, right? Excuse me now, I'm going to go throw up.
Only thing I saw in Beijing 5 years ago was an orange haze... maybe there were some trees there.
Now Chongqing is a different story but that's due mostly to the mountainous region surrounding the city.
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
Have gnu, will travel.
But new developers bring in the cash.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Pardon me, you rubber glove filled with mayonnaise, but this is a line from the article: Last time I checked, Georgia, Alabama and Nebraska had rock-ribbed, family-values, bible-believing Trump-loving Republicans running those states.
You are welcome on my lawn.
We used to plant loads of trees. And up in our mountains when we cut trees, we would plants new ones.
Now, we have California size yards such that 1 and only 1 tree goes in.
To top that off, here in the west, our forest have been devastated by pine beetle kill. That has done a real number on the pine, killing 1/2 of the trees. Thankfully, the spruce were hold up. Until now. Now, Spruce beetle is coming through with similar or same fungus that is killing them off.
So, rather than harvest these trees AND replant new ones (ideally resistant to the fungus or the beetles), our politicians simply ignore it.
We really need to push lots of new tree plants in our nation. At the same time, it is useful to take advantage of the resources. If we have dead trees, allow them to be harvested and turned into furniture, that can provide jobs,taxes, etc. Far better that, than spending taxes on firemen.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
You obviously have no idea how high the fines for cutting a coastal oak are. Other oaks are just trees, scrub oaks are weeds.
New subdivisions have saplings, duh. Same as the rest of the world. Sacramento also has many about 50-100 year old suburbs (not really subdivisions yet, still mostly 'square streets') they are full of mature fast growing trees and good sized slow growers.
I'll grant the south side isn't great. But it's hardly treeless. It's just a much hotter microclimate south of the American river bluffs. You can see that line of bluffs in the air quality maps too.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Are you saying that Georgia, Alabama and Nebraska aren't red states? Are you saying they're not run by Republicans?
Comic book parodies and the news on the Daily Show don't come close to doing the current Republican party justice. The reality is much more perverse and bizarre than any satire could possibly be.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Free nuts in the back, potential AC savings from the oaks out front, increased property value--sounds like they are paying their rent! I'll just ignore that idiotic AC.
We had a large maple in the front yard, but the roots were getting into the sewer line and we had to take it down. The other trees are still fine, but still it is a net loss.
I moved to a big city because that's where the jobs are. Even in the moderately sized city I came from there wasn't shit for work. And the cost of living wasn't much lower either.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Comment removed based on user account deletion
From my experience the biggest threat to urban trees are utility companies. I understand that they want to protect their infrastructure, but they destroy the trees and call it "maintenance". Put all power and telco lines underground in conduits that cannot be damaged by tree roots. That will cost a fortune, but I bet the ROI is rather high. I can't imagine that it is less expensive to have crews and equipment on hand to constantly fix toppled poles and cut back trees.
Another option is to go back to marking property lines with trees. I live in a neighborhood that was developed in the 1920s and on each corner of the properties is/was a tree. Not the most exact marker for property lines, but one that many appreciate. Trees keep water away from structures and give shade in the summer lowering AC cost. And they look nice.
Tax new construction that doesn't include greenery.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
This sounds like a contradiction. On the one hand you claim it's "core", on the other you claim most of it can be done remotely. If it's core, then typically it requires close-nit communication, meaning a physical presence is preferred by the org.
There are situations where teams are skilled and comfortable collaborating online using say wiki's + message boards instead of face-to-face meetings, but a group like that is rare in my experience. Most bosses are social people and prefer talking and gabbing over donuts. Maybe a new generation will appear where bosses and owners are comfortable with "e-meetings", but I don't see it yet.
There are always going to be exceptions to the rule (trend) of the gutting of rural jobs, but it seems the exceptions are shrinking, not growing.
Table-ized A.I.
Several years ago, I co-authored a book -- a photo history -- of the southern California community where I have lived for over 40 years. I reviewed old photographs of the area. I also recalled hiking over a hill into an adjacent empty valley that is now filled with houses.
The interesting thing about all this is that what used to be open meadows with widely spaced trees is now so filled with trees that distant views are blocked. Almost every house has at least one large tree. Many houses have several. I have three large trees on my property, which is about one-fifth of an acre. I also have five small or dwarf fruit trees.
My community is now completely built-out. Along the old water courses -- mostly intermittent creeks -- the land has been reserved as minimally-developed public parks with willows, cottonwoods, and centuries-old oaks. While the hill tops are public open spaces, they have no more trees than they had 50 years ago when development first started here.
The conclusion is that suburbanization does not necessarily eliminate trees. In my community, it very significantly increased the number of trees.