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)))
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
Dutch Elm Disease.
Chestnut blight.
Pine bark borers.
Lady Eboshi.
#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.
Paul Bunyan.
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!
Emerald Ash Borer has wiped out just about every Ash tree in the region... they get most treated ones as well. My town took the preemptive action to cut them down and replace them with other native species.
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
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.
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.