When tree planting hurts the climate

[@TheDanEdwards]

Let's hope people appreciate the nuances in this video, and just don't run with the title or published headlines in papers.

[@dubious_potat4587]

Scientist: My findings are useless if taken out of context The media: "scientist claims his findings are useless"

[@bassafarside6071]

​@@dubious_potat4587 I agree with you. And the title of the contribution seems to suggest that tree planting are always wrong. Someone as eloquent as Mr. Clarks trangely -- or perhaps not-- seems to favor misleading titles, namely against taking action to mitigate climate change, somewhat regularly.

[@xway2]

@@bassafarside6071 You need shocking titles to get people to click. It's the sad reality of this platform and media in general.

[@bartroberts1514]

In business, at any stage, 20% five year survival to the next stage is pretty good. But it's important to do deep dives like Simon's gone to the trouble of presenting here.

[@tracy419]

​@@bassafarside6071I honestly don't see how you come to that conclusion over the title unless English isn't your first language.

[@BlueBetaPro]

There is also the disastrous case of planting trees in Peatlands, like the Scottish Peatlands. Quote: "Peatlands are the largest natural terrestrial carbon store. They store more carbon than all other vegetation types in the world combined. Damaged peatlands are a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, responsible for almost 5% of global anthropogenic CO2 emissions." Peatlands are the real OG of carbon sequestration and storage.

[@cr0w-qz277]

Yes! Although this is now regulated In the UK - the regulations are also actually hurting peatland restoration. One of the restoration projects I have worked on BADLY needs some Afforestation around the edges to help keep the peat in place (it is mostly liquid after all).

[@Targe0]

They are good, but they are no deep carbon cycle of the oceans. Which was capturing carbon before the organisms that would cause peat to form had even evolved. But we will need to repair both those systems are all the other ones part of the carbon cycle if we want to fix what has been damaged.

[@tristanridley1601]

So... You're saying continue mining and destroying peat bogs for profit?

[@Solstice261]

In the case of peatlands in Scotland is a bit odd, while there should be trees and Scotland lacks a lot, they have a problem of the forestry industry getting in and planting sitka spruce, this mustn't be taken as Scotland not needing more trees

[@gehwissen3975]

The people who voted for right-wing extremists in the EU elections cause much more damage. Without any doubt.

[@Elongated_Muskrat]

Monoculture and non-native plants are the problem

[@juliahello6673]

They don’t plant tree crops when they are trying to plant for climate

[@evancombs5159]

@@juliahello6673 If you are trying to think sustainably, you should consider the usefulness of the trees you are planting. Like it or not, we are here to stay, and we need to be thinking about doing things in a way that makes the land useful to humans too. If the land is not useful in some way, it will be at risk of being deforested again. You just have to avoid putting too much weight towards the usefulness of the trees that you sacrifice the health of the forest. You need to find the right balance.

[@btudrus]

" Monoculture and non-native plants are the problem " Planting ANYTHING is the real problem. We need more cows and more pastures and that's why we have to eat more MEAT !!!

[@juliahello6673]

@@btudrus Cattle grazing takes up almost a quarter of the land in the United States. How much more are you looking for?

[@r.guerreiro140]

​@juliahello6673 so you better go on those lands and try to farm your own food

[@aenorist2431]

The best area to plant trees is in cities. Extreme cooling effect, air quality improvement and so much more, its regularly a keystone project.

[@nickl5658]

Only if your open up space for the trees, With all that concrete pavement, the tree has little water, no space to grow, its roots damage underground pipes and cables, and damage roads on the surface, without other trees close by, individual isolated tree are very vulnerable to toppling over from wind or simply gravity. If trees are planted in a city, the city has to be designed to handle trees and the species of tree has to be carefully selected with appropriate spacing.

[@mistmage]

@@nickl5658 Obviously planning weird single trees or rows of them is not the solution. Solution is to build parks and other green spaces.

[@alexandrudorries3307]

Never before has seeing manmade puddles inspired me with such hope.

[@Targe0]

I recommended that you look into the regenerative agriculture projects on KZbin then. As you will see, just how many different organisations are doing that kind of work and just how far along some of them are and the sheer number of different countries they are operating in. There are ones that range from whole communities to just one farm at a time. But with solid and continual support and engagement with the locations. It really helps to show that work is being done, it's just most people never hear about it happening because they don't go looking for it.

[@Justdiggit]

They fill us with joy too, that's why we like to call them "Earth Smiles"! 🌱✨

[@mikeharrington5593]

I suspect that many "carbon offsets" tree planting projects are not thought thru properly or are used by industrial corporations as a "portfolio" to cheat on their real CO2 emission impacts . So most are probably just glorious financial instruments for trading carbon offsets whether they achieve the carbon reduction or not.

[@tmmtmm]

All carbon offsets are cheating because they claim the offset when the tree is planted, there is no obligation for it to actually grow/thrive.

[@angrydragonslayer]

I've been in the offset market, you basically can't find any legit credits without knowing someone on a project.

[@poposterous236]

@@angrydragonslayer are you saying that people are encouraged to be in kahoots, that corruption is more likely? because that's what it sounds like

[@angrydragonslayer]

@@poposterous236 i don't think there's any encouragement going on I just think they saw the profit they could reap from making fake cheap credits

[@IrvineTheHunter]

@@poposterous236 Any organization breeds corruption, let's take politicians as an example. 1 It used be politicians didn't get paid so people wouldn't get into politics for money, but that meas only the rich and or corrupt can afford to be politicians. 2 So you pay the politicians so anyone can run, but what about marketing, that takes money, 1 politician represents thousands if not millions of constituents, so you need money to pay people to reach out see point 1 3 Even if you "do it right" and rely on people you know for a grassroots movement your going to be strangled by people with a larger reach. Like in the US it's common for larger organizations to pay to turn votes in states they aren't particularity connected too, so they can turn politicians to get what they want. Who will get money to drown out people who don't do what they say.

[@Respectable_Username]

I've been following and more recently become a member of Mossy Earth who, rather than focusing on tree planting for tree planting's sake, instead focus on finding key interventions that help with rewilding in general, particularly focusing on local keystone species. That more wholistic approach to ecosystem restoration really appeals to me and feels like the thing we'll need more of to reverse the damage humans have caused to so much of the environment!

[@AxelSpinnet]

Same! Big fan of Mossy Earth's work, and the content they produce is very fascinating.

[@Marsmellow492]

It is also great that they follow up on their projects

[@lifeless9768]

I'm finding it difficult to describe how thankful I am for all the work that you're putting in to make the science on climate change accessible to so many people. It is such a shame that the youtube algorithm seems to prefer lower quality content nowadays. Please, keep it up!!

[@fewbronzegames]

yeah that was my main problem with team trees, team trees just seemed to be planting in areas that didn't really need large scale replanting, the amazon rainforest should be the main target of replanting but only once the problem causing massive deforestation there in the first place can be at least mostly solved

[@vainocalebedeiro]

You dont need to replant the amazon, if you leave an adjacent area without intervention the forest will naturally spread to it

[@DrSmooth2000]

SE Brazil is drying as ITCZ is moving northward. Net Zero wouldn't be enough to reverse that, not fast. Chinese use Brazil as supply for soy and animal proteins. Stop that is hard. 80% of Amazon of 1988 is standing.

[@benmcreynolds8581]

Born raised in Oregon a lot has been replaced with Douglas fir. Mass areas of Only Douglas fir trees.. It's irritating how much that's taken over. What makes it worse is we don't have a organized system of timber management. They just cut down areas and replace it with fir trees. Creating monocultures all over. We need designated zones that rotate timber yields instead of just randomly cutting down flourishing habitats and replacing it with only fir trees all over the state.. We gotta balance the importance of timber and the importance of our unique temperate rain forests and the importance of wetland habitats

[@m0nkEz]

Monocultures are generally the natural state of forests. A bigger issue to forestry management is fire suppression. Most North American ecosystems evolved in tandem with controlled burning (thus the proliferation of fire-adapted trees like oaks and douglas firs).

[@Dragrath1]

@@m0nkEz No I don't think you can say monoculture is the "natural state" for most forests if anything it is the opposite yes you generally will have one or two dominant species but plant communities change over time in relation to herbivory disease the presence or absence of commensal species and of course fire among other things leading to processes like ecological succession. Additionally forests feature different plant communities adapted to variations in the soil and hydrology of an area within a forest. You are right about the role of fires but I don't see the evidence to support a claim that most forests are monocultures as nature is also quite effective at punishing monocultures long term due to ecological vulnerabilities. There does appear to be a link between the age of a forest ecology and its biodiversity the older a given forest ecosystem has existed under fairly stable conditions the more biodiverse it generally is assuming ecological niches aren't vacant due to human actions(as had happened over much of the world) It should also be noted that from records such as lake sediment records and pollen fossils we have some evidence that plant communities haven't always looked like they do now. For example La Brea records show that there was a drastic floral transition during the Bølling-Allerød which corresponds to massive charcoal rich lake sediment layers. Notably the change showed a major loss in plant biodiversity leaving generally only fire dependent species within the pollen record and this plant diversity is also where the Pleistocene megafauna suddenly vanish from the tar pit fossil record. Human controlled burns from that timeframe on seem to have largely replaced the niches of the now extinct megafuana which parallels similar trends seen with the arrival of humans to another ecologically human naive continent greater Australia around 40,000 years prior. In essence megafauna and plant community diversity dropped after humans arrived but full collapse/extinction it seems likely occurred during an interval of climatic change at least in NA where the record of transition is better preserved. In summary the modern forests of NA had/have coevolved with humans from the Bølling-Allerød to the present at least in California so the lack of species diversity might be better attributed to the recent timing of such a transition as well as human selective pressures, i.e. people liked certain trees more than others and promoted the ones they preferred. Frankly this kind of longer term ecological analysis is quite understudied and data deficient.

[@DrSmooth2000]

​@@Dragrath1rare you learn from a comment 🍻

[@coffeebuzzz]

@@m0nkEz Please show me a natural forest that is a monoculture. I've never seen it.

[@troyclayton]

Tree planting 'schemes' often fail because the trees chosen for planting are climax species (or economically valuable), rather than early succession species that support the web of life that makes crap work- or they just aren't taken care of. The number planted is the important part, right? Kinda like how investing in corporate stock used to be a decades long way to make money. Now, it's all about the flip. I digress.

[@MissMoontree]

Summer oaks are more expensive than firs. The needle trees are making the land too dry.

[@vulcanfeline]

in my area, poplar trees would be best to plant, but who needs their wood so they're not ;(

[@troyclayton]

@@vulcanfeline Poplar is among the best choices for paint grade trim in homes, it has a huge market. I love it unpainted in all it's unusual shades- you gotta dig the deep purple and yellow/green. edit: Any wood color can be hidden with just latex paint on poplar, it doesn't bleed through, unlike pine/fir/spruce sapping out.

[@davidcupples7622]

Trees for the Future implements a very similar "forest garden" approach in subSaharan Africa that engages local involvement

[@Targe0]

There are a lot of similar organisations working across Africa and India, all doing similar projects. But they all mostly revolve around teaching the local communities how to restore their own lands so that they can see more benefits from them. Such as more food for themselves and their farm animals. The hardest part for them has been the first generation. As after they can convince that first group to do it, they can then bring other people to see their land and show the results to them in person. As that's one of the biggest ways you sell this stuff to get people on board. But that takes a few years for the results to show enough effects for that to work. Which is why it's good that some of them have been there doing this for years already.

[@randomlyswatching9481]

​Compared to africa a continent india does have its own methods which are generational and local...which farmers follow themselves ​@@Targe0

[@randomlyswatching9481]

​​@@Targe0compared to africa Which is a continent. I have known indian farmers to have some local generational ways of handling this. Theres less desert or dry areas there too. So It's different across both. One is more green and tropical ,and has local people already engaged in their own ways.

[@TheSaltyAdmiral]

What I don't understand is why so many of these projects fail for reasons a simple Google search could have prevented, it's often well known reasons that should be obvious to anyone even remotely familiar with this kind of work.

[@GusOfTheDorks]

For the same reason that we know climate change is a massive grift. Its the government. They are that stupid and greedy.

[@bagoftrix616]

Because you're assuming that the goal of these organisations is actually to help the climate when in reality the goal is just to be able to say they planted a bunch of trees Businesses and rich individuals use charity to launder their reputations, and they want to have big impressive sounding statistics about large numbers of trees planted that they can point to to show everyone how beneficent they are, they don't care about whether it's actually doing any good Even small scale donors are attracted by big numbers more than nuance, so even a well meaning charity will find itself pressured to provide big numbers over providing real solutions Government programs have the same issue - politicians fund things that give them big headline statistics that they can brag about, they don't want meaningful change that takes longer to explain

[@RobinTheBot]

The decision makers are investors. The experts are fine print in an email to those investors. It's really that simple.

[@lihns]

Colonialist hubris lol

[@tissuewater]

@@bagoftrix616 I would give them the benefit of the doubt of being uninformed as I was before this video, regardless of result and motive at least they've actually done something they thought might help with the issue of climate change. Knowing is half the battle, but let's not undervalue the other half.

[@nikkiwilliamson4665]

I recently planted quite a few trees in my garden (most of which are going to become a hedge). The actual planting was only a tiny amount of the overall time spent on them. I spent ages working out a good mix of trees to create native hedging that is actually good for the local wildlife and suits the conditions of my garden. And then after planting I’ve been doing regular watering and keeping other plants out their way until they get more established which is still a long way off. I never considered that the tree planting charities were only planting the trees and not doing all the other stuff because it seems so obvious to me that the other stuff is absolutely vital. I will definitely be more careful which charities I support going forward. Next project is a wildlife pond and I’m several months in. Planning is nearly complete and I’m hoping to break ground next month!

[@joefer5360]

Support no charity. Use that currency that would have gone to a "charity" and upkeep your own projects that will bring charity into the world by default.

[@xaf15001]

​@@joefer5360Kinda the exact opposite of the message in the video. Some charities are actually good. Disease related ones especially since one person can't do the whole thing by themselves. That said, I do agree that you should strive to be the change you want to see.

[@rockateart9752]

I think you should do a video on them

[@tomlxyz]

​@@xaf15001 besides the group effort part most people aren't expert in fields required for charity so doing it on their own would still be quite ineffective

[@xaf15001]

@@tomlxyz Also true. Pooling funds sounds capitalistic but is usually more effective than doing it your own since there could always be circumstances stopping us. The time you spend wrangling it could be used to do something else instead. That said, if you do enjoy it then even if it's ineffective don't be afraid to try it.

[@sammyjones8279]

This is a good video about researching *all* forms of donating to charities. No matter how good the end goal, researching the path to get there is *important*

[@solar0wind]

Yeah, that's why I eventually started following Mossy Earth 2 years ago (and since recently, I'm also donating to them). As a biology master's student their nuanced and scientific approach is such a breath of fresh air amidst all this populism and quick solutions. I don't understand how people are drawn to the latter. If something isn't nuanced, I immediately distrust it.

[@WallebyDamned]

You're not sponsored, you just Dig It

[@OrangeBarnacle]

Missed opportunity!

[@AB-fh9zh]

Nice.

[@ArminKrauss]

Brilliant

[@YourCapyFrenBigly_3DPipes1999]

Lol. Dad punner name checks out

[@aiodensghost8645]

That PFP is the most EA thing I've seen, I'm yanking it

[@hazelisonline]

I remember as a Canadian I started worrying about climate in 2019, IPCC warnings getting more dire, dread setting in. Trudeau declares a climate emergency and an ambitious new climate policy. Thank god I thought. Our leaders are listening. The ambitious policy was “planting 2 billion trees.” Since 2019, most of them have died because they were planted badly and far more than 2 billion have burned down. Planting trees will never be a substitute for getting off fossil fuels. Great video!

[@J0s5p8]

Not surprising that a Trudeau plan for tree planting would fail. He's a fine talker but a poor planner and a poorer manager. Nothing fails more spectacularly then a careless experiment. You have to put your money where your mouth is and ACTUALLY follow the science . Forestry, not physics. Put someone who knows what he is doing in charge and employ people who know what they are doing to plant the trees, and if the objective is carbon capture, then stick with the program and monitor progress from start to finish.

[@universe1879]

@@J0s5p8didn’t Carbon Capture barely do anything? Especially when compared to annual emissions rate

[@cea6770]

@universe1879 They are likely using 'carbon capture' in the broad sense, including converting carbon in the atmosphere to biomass, rather than the technology 'carbon capture' which outside of factory roofs is mostly useless.

[@spiguy]

Et sans trop savoir comment, le pipeline qu'il a acheté va nous aider dans la transition énergétique. Alors que les émissions dont il sera responsable nous coûteront plus cher...

[@Bushman9]

Funny how Trudeau’s climate emergency didn’t curtail our exporting of 30 million tons of coal annually.

[@Targe0]

That main thing people forget is that we have a carbon debt of about 200 ish years that we need to deal with. So we need to cut our emissions to stop adding to that debt, but we also need to start paying off that debt with things that will help repair the global ecosystems and climate. We can't just plant some trees and walk away, as ask any farmer how well their crops will do if they just sowed their seeds and walked away. Sites of replanting need to be monitored and cared for, for years. As most trees in damaged areas will be at risk of dying for at least 10 years. As it can take that long for their presence to properly help restore a depleted ecosystem to the point, they can be left to nature. It also allows for most trees to reach reproductive maturity, which is needed if you want a site to be self-perpetuating. So we need to do full ecosystem regeneration in a lot of sites. Which is why the places seeing the best results are the ones that get the local communities involved and teaches them just how beneficial these practices can be for their way of life.

[@danilooliveira6580]

there is not enough available land on the planet to plant enough trees to reabsorb all the CO2 we released, we would have to start turning deserts into forests to pay our CO2 debt with planting trees, but that would just destroy different ecosystems in the process. not even if we turn all our farms back into forests we would go back to pre-industrial levels, since the CO2 we released was trapped underground. sadly, if we want to go back to the holocene optimum, we will need CO2 capture technologies or strategies that actually work and are not just a scam. otherwise we will have to accept the climate we have now is our new reality and stop all CO2 release to make sure it won't get worse.

[@YourCapyFrenBigly_3DPipes1999]

​@@danilooliveira6580 nah I have to disagree. Of course we should do our best to stop all further emissions, but I also believe it's very vital to continue with rewilding and re-greening processes. We will learn from our mistakes along the way.

[@danilooliveira6580]

@@YourCapyFrenBigly_3DPipes1999 yes, we should, but not as an effort to combat climate change, we should do it to restore ecosystems and protect biodiversity. The only thing that can stop climate change now is getting rid of fossil fuels, we shouldn't plant trees expecting to help climate change in any way.

[@YourCapyFrenBigly_3DPipes1999]

​@@danilooliveira6580 that's true.

[@gehwissen3975]

"This is the fastest climate change in earth history" (IPCC 2019 special report) This info should be enough - to end this sugar talk.

[@theCodyReeder]

Yeah my own tree planting effort failed. only a few of the trees I planted at the ranch made it through the last drought. Ive realized that the climate that the native trees are adapted to has moved to higher elevation and or farther north. So I need to plant different, nonnative, trees if I plant them at all.

[@DrSmooth2000]

Ranch implies Greater Texas area? "Gotta think Fourth Dimensionally, Marty" Mexican shrubberies will be best suited to your property soon or long. Unless making a tree museum should only worry about weird African or Asian import. Anywhere else within a day's drive is native to me

[@laletemanolete]

Simon, can you do a video on start ups such as Mossy Earth or Planet Wild? Do you think they are honest? Do you think their work actually restores the environment?

[@davidcupples7622]

Climate scientist Sabine Hassenfelder recommends Planet wild and imo M Earth is just as good.

[@MrDesmondPot]

@@davidcupples7622I believe she is a theoretical physicist and a KZbinr, not a climate scientist. She is a scientist who occasionally makes videos about climate, not a climate scientist.

[@Targe0]

Most of what they do is to give money to since based projects that already exist that just need extra funding. And they are also fairly upfront about where their funds go. Unlike a lot of similar projects. So I think they can actually be trusted. Especially since they continually revisit their project sites and provide updates on them. Meaning they are doing quality long term monitoring, which is the most vital part about if a climate eco project is going to work or not.

[@HedgeWitch-st3yy]

I agree about Mossy Earth. They also share their failures and what they learn from them and how they correct which I think speaks to their integrity.

[@Solstice261]

Mossy earth is fairly open and work on a variety of habitat recovery, not just trees, they also take a lot of scientific counselling so there's that

[@jorgecandeias]

Not to mention that in many spots of the planet, tree planting can indeed remove carbon from the atmosphere for a few years, but then the whole thing burns up and there goes the carbon back to the atmosphere.

[@Justdiggit]

Simon, thank you so much for creating this very insightful video and for giving us the opportunity to showcase our projects. Spreading awareness about the effectiveness of nature-based techniques is a crucial first step in building a greener and cooler future for all! 🌍🌱

[@mr.duck1248]

My plant ecology professor talked about how grasslands are often overlooked in their ability to sequester carbon because they don’t have very many trees. He mentioned how simply planting tons of trees everywhere is not the solution to carbon sequestration, although it is very helpful in certain places whose natural landscapes are forests

[@DrSmooth2000]

Everywhere capable of having trees will have trees. Only humans would block this in favor of fields. Grasslands are for marginal areas with too much wind, drought, fire for trees to establish Wildcard is shifting eco regions with GW. Some cases make sense to plant trees in inferior Grasslands expecting the weather to catch up over lifespan

[@AtomicBlohm]

Watching these videos reignites my urge to do something more impactful with my life! I have a background in science but went into consultancy after my PhD, for which I don't blame myself as I needed work and times were hard. But it really doesn't satisfy me, and I'll regret not doing something more.

[@solar0wind]

The organisation Mossy Earth sometimes has some job openings, mainly for biologists, but I doubt that they're well paid tbh, considering that they're a quite small organisation😅 Still, they're a good organisation that fulfils all the points on the check-list.

[@cr0w-qz277]

Id love to hear your take on mossy earth - from what i have seen they are well researched and very transparent.

[@Targe0]

Yeah, they are very upfront, especially when a project doesn't work out. Which fortunately doesn't happen very often because they do their research and don't do anything overly ambitious. As most of their projects tend to be, let the natural system of the area do its thing and just help to stop what ever is preventing it from doing that. Like putting up fencing to stop things like deer eating all the saplings. Or bringing in seeds to an area that no longer has a natural seed bank to draw from. And then, unlike so many less than great projects, they actually stick around and keep checking on the progress for months to years. And they also don't hyper focus on a single location or country but diversify their sites to wherever a good opportunity presents itself.

[@lordgigenshtain]

hmmm. we should expand seagrass meadows... its a pretty good idea. fog gang out.

[@simontillson482]

Yep. So many good outcomes from having more seagrass in coastal waters. Absorbs excess nutrients, provides food for endangered animals, reduces silt loss, creates a habitat for baby fish, crabs and beneficial worms, bacteria and other recyclers, and oh yes, absorbs massive amounts of CO2 and reverses the spread of dead zones. Did I forget anything?

[@deepbluetree]

Sadly just trying to protect them and keep them alive seems pretty hard 😢 Here in Norway they always lose to a sea port there and a local production plant here. They are mostly protected but money and local jobs in small districts always win out. The result is the seagrass beds bit by bit disappearing

[@lordgigenshtain]

@@deepbluetree in Croatia people remove them so they sand have sandy beaches, so more tourists arrive.

[@deepbluetree]

@@lordgigenshtain that is honestly just depressing 😔 And probably Norwegian tourists are partly to blame

[@lordgigenshtain]

@@deepbluetree mostly Germans 😅

[@nightowl6260]

The Chicago area has lost huge numbers of Elm and Ash trees. Too many of the same type of tree were planted in groups and they were easily attacked by fungus and pests.

[@DrSmooth2000]

Emerald Ash Borer. Untreated pallets from China Least say not climate

[@anthonyj7989]

I come from Australia, and I have planted all sorts of trees, including mangroves. You are right in what you are saying. Many of the planting I have been involved in - have failed. I find that government departments are only interested in how many trees that have been planted and not how many trees have survived. What I now am trying to do in the locations that I plant trees in is only plant a small number of trees and look after them (this is not always achievable because government departments like big community tree planting events). Also, I do not plant trees in bushland that I am working in if the area only needs the weeds removed (this is also not always possible because some people think that you must plant trees when you are doing a restoration project in bushland). What I have found is that if you have the right people in the tree planting project and you know the problems you are going to have and know how to address them all, tree planting can be very rewarding.

[@tmmtmm]

I'm from Melbourne and the places that desperately need more trees are around suburban businesses and residences, particularly new ones. The lack of greenery and amount of hardscaping in new housing estates is depressing. Little boxes all in a row with everyone inside and cranking their A/C's 24/7 - this is not how we reduce emissions. If they have any greenery it's just a lawn and sometimes that is fake plastic turf. The average person hates trees and thinks that anything over a few meters tall is 'big'. They are afraid they will fall on their house in their sleep or something... A one in 20 year storm rolled through several months back and took out a lot of trees and branches. I still hear chainsaws regularly probably because people are removing trees in their yards that survived the storm but they are now afraid of. People also hate native trees because "they drop branches and look messy". I've had people tell me that the native "wattle" trees (actually bottlebrushes and paperbarks..) are the cause of their hayfever when it's probably wind pollinated non-native trees and grasses that are causing it. The councils plant non-native trees because that is what people expect/want. When the council plants native trees (or refuses to remove them), people seem to think the council is trying to oppress the residents or something. I have seen residents rip out a newly council planted native tree on their nature strip and replace it with some horticultural atrocity instead because they are afraid that "it will grow too big and drop too many branches and leaves". There needs to be a culture change.

[@grandmothergoose]

I'm in the outback and I've seen a few tree planting disasters around my area. Trees that are native, but not locally native, and not suitable for the local climate, they die and people wonder why. Feral goats are a bigger problem than lack of water when it comes to trees not surviving. Not to mention the amount of climate credit scamming that goes on out here where no one is going to bother checking on it, people claiming to plant new trees and if they are checked on years later, they claim they planted trees that were already there, and no one cares so long as they get to show off their carbon credits. To offset the carbon of just one person would require anywhere between hundreds to tens of thousands of trees depending on exactly how one wants to calculate it and what they take into account. There's just not enough viable land to plant enough trees to counteract us all. I love trees and will be planting a couple of dozen in my little property in the coming years, but ultimately when it comes to what living organisms have the best chance to save us from ourselves, I'm cheering for team phytoplankton. Nevermind the trees, protect the oceans and waterways.

[@tmmtmm]

@@grandmothergoose the irony is that the world will survive climate change. Humans are going to extinct a few species in the process but nature will bounce back afterwards - after humans extinct themselves.

[@Jackhatfieldfreediver]

I'm in Sydney not just tree planting but coastal bush regeneration work In alot of places is always failing. All the effort for the initial work and barely any followup so within a year it's almost like it never happened

[@tarrotpatch]

​@@tmmtmmSeconded; we have a lot of empty developments in western Sydney that are *piping* hot in summer because of the complete lack of street trees (and because the roofs are all painted black. which idiot thought black roofs in Australia was a good idea?) I'm also studying ecology and the weed removal is honest to god the biggest pain in my arse. If I never see another thorny asparagus again it will be too soon.

[@anthonycovert9113]

I think that planting tree monocultures and non-native trees is part of the reason. Forests don’t only consist of trees. They include bushes, shrubs, creepers and flowers. Among other plants

[@karlrovey]

And in the case of grasslands, trees in general are not native to the area.

[@anthonycovert9113]

@@karlrovey I agree. The local climate has grown together to fit its own sphere since time immemorial.

[@karlrovey]

@@anthonycovert9113 In Oklahoma, we're starting to have issues caused by green belts springing up.

[@hairforceone2821]

Finally man made puddles make sense. I thought Manchester City Council were just lazy for not doing anything about them, but it turns out they are trying to make Manchestsr a lush green space.

[@lilcrowlet1802]

Making use of that yogs connection for a nice set, very cool

[@camicus-3249]

who knew bricks could be so recognisable?

[@Targe0]

Likely the most professional thing to ever happen on that set.

[@medium-unit-onbreak]

Huh

[@HedgeWitch-st3yy]

Carbon cowboys in the US are an interesting project. I know lots of people want an end to meat agriculture but that's not going to happen immediately and some landscapes / soils / ecosystems are strongly connected to the grazing of large herbivores. They promote adaptive, multi paddock grazing and it removes the use of fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides and are seeing the return of native grasses, insects and wild life generally. Connected to a science programme. The removal of the chemical additions reduces the use of fossil fuels. Seems like we need to implement lots of restoration in lots of places that make sense for the local ecosystem and the local population in order for them to stick and then build from there as we see what works. And also not go for massive scale but repeatability.

[@ItWasSaucerShaped]

There is no way that something as minor as restoring some grasslands is going to compensate for industrial ranching's enormous carbon impact. 'I know lots of people want an end to meat agriculture but that's not going to happen' I mean, if that's the attitude then there's no point in discussing climate change at all then because if it's not going to happen then we're fucked. It's equivalent to saying, 'I know lots of people want an end to fossil fuel use but that's not going to happen'

[@sovietmoose5624]

If its harm reduction its good imo, but if it expands instead of retrofits the industrys land use and/or production, then its not harm reduction.

[@narvuntien]

Gondwana link does great stuff here in Western Australia. The issue is there is a lot of tree planting in the state is being funding by Gas exporting companies that basically run the state.

[@DrSmooth2000]

Use the money

[@eric2500]

the red zones in regards to the albedo issue seems to be desert or Artcic cold desert.

[@raerohan4241]

Speaking of, that's also another reason why melting polar ice caps are an issue (aside from sea level change) - the reduction in albedo means more warming, which means more melting, which means more warming, etc.

[@DrSmooth2000]

​@@raerohan4241most of the expansion of vegetation in Greenland has come at 'cost' of Polar Desert. Ice free but too much wind off the ice sheets and too little rain. Polar deserts used to test Mars tech and technique. Let the alpine meadows grow ¡!

[@merpie1017]

Like a minute and a half into this video, I started seeing the numbers in parenthesis in the corners of the video. I checked the description and saw all the sources in order and I instantly subbed. This stuff needs to be more common!

[@Spikeba11]

There have been studies that indicate skills are not nearly as transferable as we previously thought.

[@rmcnally3645]

I love Mossy Earth because they check every one of the boxes of "Support Organizations That..." which are listed in this video ✌🏻

[@standardnerd8691]

As someone who comes from a rural area, I second that working with the local people, with what benefits them in mind is the best course of action. If locals are invested in the project everything gets taken care of much better and the project builds momentum. It also builds morale for that community.

[@bartroberts1514]

Coppicing - The opposite of "Lollipopping", also called "Stooling", where a tree is cut off near the base of the trunk to force cane growth while preserving the root system. Festooning - Bending the main trunk (or lopping off the main trunk so a side branch takes over) to encourage cane growth while preserving the root system. Lollipopping - Removing side branch growth to encourage height and a habit of canopy development. Harvests biomass while making for brighter understorey. Pollarding - Cutting off the trunk above head level (or above level of deer forage) to encourage cane growth while preserving the root system. These methods increase the rate of high quality wood fiber development, though with smaller diameter 'cane' growth up to sixty feet long (or more), easier to harvest and transport, and with engineered wood techniques, pyrolysis, and other methods more generally profitable than lumbering older growth while avoiding senescence.

[@SeeNickView]

I think your perspective would be quite valuable to a broader discussion about this topic, especially given the interests of balancing ecosystem flourishing with human exploitation. Once again, old growth forests are affirmed to be ever important compared to young growth ones.

[@bartroberts1514]

@@SeeNickView Old growth forests are of course vital niche ecosystems which need appropriate interconnection. This complicates the nuanced discussions needed to produce meaningful plans for success in the 98%+ of forests -- like afforestation using scaled up Miyawaki principles and recovered forest farming techniques -- when people come to the table only with confrontation and blame.

[@obansrinathan]

I hadn't heard of festooning or lollipoping before so thanks. Historically British woodland was mostly heavily managed by coppicing and pollarding so it would be very interesting to see these forestry techniques more used again.

[@bartroberts1514]

@@obansrinathan Imagine if these techniques spread to the woodlands of North America, of Russia, heck to any LDC where they might keep forest diversity higher and conserve wilderness for the wild while such agroforestry gives you all the VOCs and cellulose you need to replace fossil trade with renewable, secure, clean, ecosystem-sustaining energy and materials.

[@raerohan4241]

​​@@bartroberts1514 Idk if most corporations would care. The thing about these techniques is that they require more time and effort than simply chopping them down. They're better in the long term, but as evidenced by literally every corporation ever, they care more about short term results than long term impacts. Most of these techniques were only developed in the first place once Europe was so massively deforested that people _had_ to be careful with the trees they had left or risk having none at all Edit: what I mean to say is that, in order for these corporations to care, there would need to be some kind of pressure on them from elsewhere. Either from their shareholders or from the government. And just that fact alone is a massive hurdle

[@noahchars849]

It’s also worth noting that old-growth forests sequester far more carbon than younger trees.

[@raerohan4241]

That's because they have more growth and more biomass. You need young forests in order for old-growth forests to exist in the first place

[@CaptainBlitz]

Ah shit Simon. The title and thumbnail are giving me TeamTrees flashbacks

[@joshgoodman9186]

I was working in New Zealand restoring native wetlands and waterways with a good mix of plants. Good survival rates and helped keep waterways clean as the waterways were fenced off which was probably the most important part.

[@DrSmooth2000]

Fence doubling or tripling costs

[@amillison]

Really great points. You can't plant trees in isolation. Tree planting needs to be integrated with community economics so locals are incentivized to care for the trees. Here's a massive successful example I documented in South India: kzbin.info/www/bejne/l5W3pHZth7Wfi9U And here's one in Senegal: kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z32mhYmFlL5oiNU Regarding the albedo effect, you can't just look at trees in the context of global heat reflection. There are localized effects for the people benefitting from the shade directly.

[@boaznash847]

Sad to hear that the Bastin et. al. paper was misleading. I was really excited by that paper.

[@Reletr]

A really interesting story related to this is the fingerprint video by Vox, which covers this exact this happening in Uruguay. Highly recommend if you're further interested

[@RandallSlick]

I've been planting Buddleia, Rhododendron and Japanese Knotweed in my neighbours' back garden and if I say so myself, it's been a roaring success. I may get in touch with Just Dig It with my thoughts and advice.

[@YEs69th420]

This comment would send a gardner into a frenzy

[@samuelprice538]

This is why I get so annoyed when KZbinrs who should know better take sponsorship from people like Wren. No amount of offsetting, even when done properly, gives you an excuse to continue emitting your own co2.

[@FairyGirlMagic]

I helped ones reforsting in a tree school (insects who profite from the hot summers destroyed a lot of trees) They told us directly, that 1/10 planted trees in tree schools will make it. In Nature even less. I was so surprised and shocked that even TREES have such a hugh mortility rate...

[@aarononeal9830]

Hi please consider talking about Ecosia they are a search engine that plants trees ( if you see this comment please like it and respond)

[@lopis]

Yup. They also do the half circles in many places! And work with the local population!

[@aarononeal9830]

​@@lopis They do

[@aarononeal9830]

​@lopis Ecosia deserves alot more attention than it gets

[@aarononeal9830]

​@@lopis Especially with Google being evil

[@eliaspohl5741]

I agree, I have used ecosia for so long now, but I'm honestly skeptical about it..

[@noahhosking495]

I actually have a bit of experience working in the field planting mangroves in Malaysia! We went with uni (from Australia) and worked with an NGO call the Global Environment Centre. You really hit the nail on the head with this vid!!!

[@nevisstkitts8264]

13:28 "net cooling" needs to include local cloud effects. These are generally ignored in simpler models, but ground truth verification accounts for clouds. In many areas, increasing tree cover by a significant amount results in increased prevalence of cloud cover. Clouds have reflrctive albedo and increase cooling by shade. Regardless, the solution to long term effects is managed sylviculture, specifically SRF employing C4 trees such as Paulonia. The objective is not native woodland but sustained production with the side benefit of absorbing 12 to 20 times the CO2 that naive tree planting entails. Species selection ensures that cultivation precludes the introduction of invasive organisms. Active management produces economic benefits and reduces risk of long term project failure. A systems approach can eliminate wasteful harvesting methods such as clear cutting.

[@DrSmooth2000]

You have right approach

[@supermanifolds]

Love this channel, such nuance is a rare thing on the Internet

[@hananas2]

One organization I really like is Mossy earth, they're on KZbin as well and they do some really great, well thought out nature restoration projects.

[@ervivekchoubey]

When it comes to sucking out Carbon from the atmosphere, people think trees are the only way to go about without realising that natural ponds, lakes, wetlands and aquatic ecosystem does the same at a better rate than plants. Unfortunately, many small lakes and ponds are being encroached upon or have gotten dry over the time due to rapid and unplanned urbanization.

[@gaarakabuto1]

Not all the papers you mentioned have concrete proof of what they were studying, they were mostly collecting data on the studied phenomenon. For example the albedo paper is not suggesting that man planted forests are necessarily harmful for the local environment but that they can be based on this observation of albedo increase which equals to overall average temperature increase.

[@DrSmooth2000]

Well. Whole new topic in itself but put your finger on it. Many ecologies benefit from warming. Beavers in Arctic 'conundrum' prime example

[@pipertripp]

Definitely interesting and highlights, once again, how there is no simple solution to our global problems.

[@christianhathaway5423]

Just gonna say man, “plant trees” “don’t plant trees” “recycle!” “Don’t recycle!” is getting old, and it only inspires me to do nothing at all

[@ABear3A]

Yes someone will do something about it later anyway

[@wasserkatze7822]

i think the video laid out out quite well tho? they listed the things to look out for when supporting tree planting issues. and in general, helping the environment isn't something individual people can do on their own. the problem isn't just individuals not recycling, it's giant companies caring about profit first and foremost. capitalism and endless growth will kill us if we don't start fighting for system change. but that can also mean organising in a union, protesting, helping your local environment by looking after the nature around you! i wish it were as simple as just sorting your trash correctly. but a better world is possible, we just have to start at the right points and not play into the hands of capitalism. who profits from your despair? not you. not the environment. the ones who profit are the corporations selling you their next overpriced "definitely good for the environment trust me bro"-solutions (including getting paid to plant trees in a way that does fuck-all for our climate!) sorry for the rant. i am certain a better world is achievable. i have to be. letting the despair win won't help us. and i'd rather do something to help than watch it burn and do nothing.

[@ivanlol7153]

It’s almost like there isn’t a simple solution to a complex problem like global warming.

[@horizon8584]

​@@wasserkatze7822it might be dumb to care for the planet as an individual, to still have belief might be, uncool. But as humans I think we're meant to believe, so why not believe in our selves. We might just be ants in humongous colonies but we're ants with our own stories.

[@clogl]

This makes me wonder about my grandparents and their effort to replant trees after a fire at their cabin. We recently visited Yellowstone Ntl Park, and seeing the natural regrowth in all stages after fires was fascinating to me. I wonder how my grandparents’ efforts to facilitate regrowth is actually impacting the biosphere at the cabin. They’re focusing on regrowing two kinds of trees that were already there before the fire- Planting healthy yearling trees and so far have seen success. The park their cabin is in already has plenty of untouched burnt area that will continue the natural cycle of fires so I think what they’re doing will be helpful. Then again, with the dark warming effect and being in the mountains so close to the sun I wonder if it’ll warm it down there. So many interesting things to think about! I will say, it has become a haven for elk, deer, bears and mountain lions due to the new tree growth and they have a TON of different grasses, wildflowers, and they’re atop a hill by a lake so the biodiversity is crazy good. I love going up there and seeing the wild birds, bobcats starting families in the firewood piles, and deer stashing their fawns in the new tree growth. It’s a really nice natural park and a good retreat from life. (Located in Southern Colorado)

[@ElectricityTaster]

Trees in cities are always good tho.

[@bartroberts1514]

Consider Miyawaki Forests for your neighborhood.

[@Targe0]

Only if they are the correct type of trees. As not every kind of tree does well in cities and some cities drainage systems aren't compatible with some kinds of leaves. Which can cause them to clog up and cause flooding in a lot of places where that aspect wasn't considered. Some also are too shallow rooting and that causes all sorts of problems in a developed environment. So, like all things, you need to select the right plants for the job.

[@danilooliveira6580]

@@Targe0 because nothing can be that easy. sadly, we planned our cities poorly from the beginning.

[@DSAK55]

yes, but it does nothing for *Global* Warming

[@ElectricityTaster]

@@Targe0 Just sweep up the damn leaves!

[@Nighthawkinlight]

I appreciate your highlighting of the paper excerpt at 6:37 in respect to finding solutions that are in unison with the goals of rural communities, and acknowledging they are the ones really getting their hands dirty managing local ecosystems. In the current culture of the US I've heard the term "rural people" or synonyms thereof used derogatorily on many occasions. It's nice for once to hear someone looking for environmental solutions that don't write off rural communities as enemy strongholds.

[@LordWhirlin]

There's also the new study about green light evaporating water, which causes a phase change to lower the temperature of the area where the water was evaporated. This may cause cloud cover implications and have broader climate impacts on a meta scale not adequately studied yet.

[@DrSmooth2000]

Do you have any details? Sounds like the evaporating without heat discovery Didn't catch a green filter or relation to cloud system aspect

[@blueredingreen]

Someone should make a website for laypeople that's a database of charities, where experts evaluate categories of charities and individual charities. That would really help with the whole "do your research" thing, and it could make it easy for people to find charities in the first place. The same could also be said for a database of climate solutions.

[@DrSmooth2000]

Who gatekeeps it?

[@robeagleR]

what I'm hearing, It does work ; If we do it carefully and right but we are doing it a tad little bit wrong currently.

[@kairon156]

I like videos like this. I follow Mossy Earth who seem to understand things like this. Knowing where to add things or remove other invasive things.

[@lilygreenall2837]

I use Ecosia - they seem pretty legit.

[@lorenl5620]

definitely fell for these tree planting schemes when I was a teenager--thinking that using a browser that planted trees was more influential than it actually was. I also didn't fully understand the consequences of planting large mono-culture forests, so I suppose I should be a bit more kind to my past self ^_^'

[@FabiWann]

Shoutout to MossyEarth?

[@savage.4.24]

I really enjoyed this! Definitely worth a like and sub!! Alot of it is things i had heard from my grandparents i got to learn from them till they were nearly 100 years old.

[@Conus426]

oh yay its the jingle jam one! will definitely donate to just dig it again this year.

[@Justdiggit]

It's us! Thank you (again)🌱

[@christianspanggaard]

Important closing note! Doing good doesn't mean you can keep on doing harm. One can do good and do harm at the same time, but minimizing harm should be the first step.

[@inregionecaecorum]

I have planted a diversity of species at high density in a location that was formerly neglected waste land, it is doing well.

[@albertoandrade9807]

There was an article on the cbc (canada) about how tree planting made forest fires worse. They were prone to start precisely where the planting happened (because crowded young pines are like that unlike other trees that are not the best for lumbers)

[@tylerwhorff7143]

Planet Wild us doing a lot of really cool climate based projects that tackle specific things rather than slapping some trees in and calling it good

[@gilsthyname256]

Kinda reminds that we as a species are capable of seeing the circle of life yet I don’t think we realize that seeing it makes it almost impossible for us to be part of it.

[@eric2500]

IT IS SUMMER I love trees more than ever. SO. It is about biodiversity isn't it? Soil biodiversity for a start.

[@Targe0]

It's more than that. It's about following through with a site long after you have done the initial tree planting. As to really do something like that properly, you need to continually visit and plant more trees in the site till the first generation of them reaches reproductive age and can start self-perpetuating. And you want saplings planted in different years so you have a good mix of different aged trees there so they don't all start to die from old age at the exact same time. It also helps you see if the locals are really helping or hindering the project and can further try to sway them to the cause. The reason why so many projects fail is after they plant them, they rarely ever go back to the site. So they tend to see the most die offs or continued negative practices.

[@DrSmooth2000]

Hmm. I wonder if Grasslands fans are winter people? Fellow summer trees Appreciator 🦥

[@stephoh8613]

I know a non-profit that matches all those criteria! They do it as part of an agroecology program/practice to support small farmers, economic development social development and restore biodiversity! Simon, if you need future topics to cover on more economic/agriculture, they are small but super promising! But this video will already be great to help them explain their action and why they do it that way, thanks to all your research here! Thanks so much!!

[@kendrajohnson6535]

Thank you, Simon. Great to hear about Justdiggit.

[@shivammahajan303]

That was quick! I liked your guide on the last video. Keep up the good work! After watching this video, I think much of it can be done with local planning and feedback to a body of experts, like a council, with a planned goal set at the start by them. It could be like a set of five-year plans, but for the environment.

[@DenjelxD]

Good video! Learned something new. Thank you ^^

[@nicklittle8399]

Tree planting should never be implemented as a response to climate change. It should be used to solve problems such as deforestation, fragmentation, land use change, terrain stability, ecosystem preservation, and ecosystem rehabilitation. These are the sorts of things that trees can solve. They won't solve our climate.

[@Dead.garden]

We need more diversity. In cities all abandoned or dilapidated buildings remove them and turn them Into native trees and bushes flowers and more. If they don't want to all new buildings must require 30% of there energy come from renewable energy they produced themselves. Have all big box stores with parking lots bigger then 7 acres require them to remove 35% and go up soo parking garages you can even add an extra level to have more spots. Require the top of the parking garages to be reinforced to have plant life mybe even trees with the whole top being covered in 8 feet deep soil can reduce heat but yes adds lots of weight. The now open part of the parking lot can be covered in native plants as well with vines growing up the fence going up the parking garage to reduce heat even more and clean up the air and reduce flooding. Any big box stores with 15+ acres of parking lot should be required to remove 65% but do the same as I said up top to help reduce heat and flooding

[@kattkatt744]

This is actually on pare with what Simon is describing in this video, an idea that seems good, but actually isn't. The best thing cities can do to be ecological is to stop sprawl. That means building infill, building the missing middle, getting amenties in walkable distance and making the infrastructure for that walking (and biking). Dense cities have much smaller carbon fot print (and are also much more economically resilient (so you get the synergy of what is good for nature and humans)) than sprawling ones.

[@Dead.garden]

@@kattkatt744 most definitely they should remove the it needs to be at least 60% urban and make it like idk 40% to start and see how it goes if not to good well try 45%. Hell we can line the sides of highways and freeways with native life but definitely from seed to reduce costs and let them adapt better. Or just only line the sides of off ramps to help out. Definitely not going to fix anything but it should help if they don't over do it and try maintaining all of it just so long as they don't go into the road let it be wild. Your thoughts.

[@kattkatt744]

@@Dead.garden A much better and long term solution is to get ride of the need for those high ways. Redusing the overall need for cars is goingt to do a lot more for carbon reduction than appeasing your consciousness by changing the plants along the roads. Again, desification of cities and better infrastructure for not using cars is going to both be better for the planet and people. It is sad to see you literally advocate for what this video askes you to not do, wanting to slap down trees where trees are not the solution.

[@Mirkkko]

@@Dead.garden It is great to see you being open to hear what others are thinking about your thoughts. However, I agree with @kattkatt744, your ideas resemble exactly the mindset the video warns against. We all learn everyday!

[@sovietmoose5624]

Yes. No, make them into new dense housing so cities dont expand as much and suburbs can finally be legislated out of existence. No, while microgeneration is okay, dedicated energy production tends to be far more efficent both costs wise and materially, focus on making houses more energy efficent. Yes and NO. Parking lots spend the vast vast vast majority of their life unoccupied with very little time having large occupancy and even less for meeting capacity. Do not build extremely carbon intensive parking complexes. Just get rid of much of the parking lot, and eventually, virtually all of it. NO, do not pour fuckloads of concrete to put 8 feet of soil on top of any parking lots just so carcentricty stays in place. You're not gonna curb the heat island effect with that, you're not going to do any carbon mitigation with it. A good video on stuff like that is "Why Green Skyscrapers are a Terrible Idea" by AdamSomething. TL:DR is use space efficently and you can have massive green spaces in urban areas without making horribly heavy buildings. Yes to all excpet the parking garage. Sure. I don't mean to sound so antagonistic, but its sorta what the video itself is about and it collides with a specific interest of mine so seeing "build parking garages" just was shocking. Personal vehicles and their infrastructure is one of the most detrimental things to this planet, it prompted sprawl which destroyed nature, it took cities away from pedestrians, and it made cities unberably hot. Car centricity is the only reason big box stores exist beyond major urban shopping complexes and said carcentricty is the only reason you'd need parking galore. While planting trees alongside freeways and on and off ramps could help depending on whether trees are suited to that enviroment, its like planting trees around a coal plant, it wont ever offset the issue thats right there. I do reccomend you look into channels like AdamSomething, NotJustBikes, and if you havent watched Simon Clarks video on Electric Bikes impact on the climate, I do implore you to give that one a watch. Knowledge is power and with it you can improve the world.

[@sebastianjost]

Saw this video twice, with different thumbnails. Definitely preferred the one showing the grid-like forest. It clearly illustrated a problem.

[@bartroberts1514]

Look to Project Drawdown's Climate Solutions 101 Roadmap, and where biomass afforestation fits. Overlooked too much is the cost of methane from anaerobic decay of plant matter. If you're planting trees (or anything), harvest before it rots, to avoid more methane emission as well as to divert markets from fossil emitting products.

[@DrSmooth2000]

Decaying forest litter is big source of CH4?

[@bartroberts1514]

@@DrSmooth2000 It depends. Aerobic digestion converts cellulose, lignin and sugars to CO2. Anaerobic digestion, such as in termite guts or the kind of wet rot in the absence of oxygen that smells bad tends toward CH4 instead. With precipitation changes due to climate change, in some places that will mean more CH4 emission. With wildfire at low temperature and with low oxygen, biochar instead forms and that stuff can remain solid sequester essentially forever. As can peat, sometimes. Point being, if you harvest cellulose then besides depriving future wildfires of fuel, you can also deprive fossil trade of market by producing biofuels and terra preta to reduce demand for ammonia (made from natural gas).

[@tsuaririndoku]

There’s the thing. Plant the tree isn’t solving the issue. Unless you plant those trees and keep taking care of it. Or you plant them in rainy season. Which makes things slightly easier but still you have to taken care of it. I know this, because my mom loves planting stiff in the garden. Even Bigger Trees needs a year or two to adapt to the soil. So it relies on your watering. Still you have to nurse them until you making sure that it’s grown well enough.

[@--sql]

Simon, have you seen Shaun Overton on youtube? He's trying to turn a wasteland in Texas into a desert forest. Pretty neat project.

[@shawnsg]

Perfect example of problematic.

[@--sql]

@@shawnsg Is Shaun Overton problematic?

[@nedheywood6125]

​@@shawnsgNot problematic. He's trying to restore a desert forest that was already there in the past.

[@shawnsg]

@@--sql it's an example of trying to turn "fix" something by planting trees.

[@shawnsg]

@@nedheywood6125 it wasn't a "desert forest" whatever that actually means.

[@liltatorvert5583]

I appreciate your efforts in educating people

[@rjdverbeek]

Maybe the next time a video on "When clickbait titles hurt the climate"?

[@johannes2273]

Thanks for the video! I didnt know at all!

[@JakeRichardsong]

There are plenty of tree-planting projects that go well. If a few fail here or there through poor planning or execution, who cares. Trees have many free benefits. Also, not all trees are planted in areas where crops are grown. That idea is misinformation.

[@GusOfTheDorks]

Welcome to his channel. Most of it is misinfo and fear mo gering.

[@James2210]

These failure rates aren't surprising. I know $1 won't get me a quality tree planted well, it's common sense. Wish they would bump it up to $10 or $100 to increase survival rates

[@weevilsnitz]

"Failure rates are high" never stop anything because you fail. Find what works, then put the work into ensuring everyone knows it and chooses those strategies instead. Ecosia has written articles about what works and what doesn't, why it's important to plant successfully, being transparent about only counting trees that actually survived after 3 years, keep in mind not disturbing the local ecosystem, and are a true non-profit that use their income to pay for tree-planting projects at a local-scale and are transparent about their financials on their website. Especially, they support local economies this way, don't deal in monocultures, and focus on regenerating forests that once existed.

[@HedgeWitch-st3yy]

Their latest video about planting in India shows how a specific local project they support achieve an 85% survival rate because they get lots of people to plant a few and then care for them properly.

[@bagel3703]

Please stop putting so much faith in hierarchies.

[@marielavela7952]

Thank you!❤

[@garreswe]

So when companies like Apple say that a certain product is climate "positive" because the company gives some money to a tree planting project probably it has no actual benefit to the environment.

[@RememberTheChase]

I totally thought that planting trees would always be a positive, then Sabine and now this is saying not always, learn something new every day!

[@Traster_Bean]

Our planets issue is climate change more than just specifically global warming. As we burn through out ozone with fossil fuels the weather will continue to get more extreme, including cold fronts and blizzards, followed by extremely hot draughts, then suddenly back to another blizzard before the month is out. That is the data trend that people are concerned about.

[@JayLikesLasers]

I can't parse that second paragraph: "should focus on policies that ... hinder the displacement of ecosystems with export-oriented commodity agriculture". 1) Does that mean you want "export-oriented commodity agriculture"? I thought exports were bad because of high carbon embedded in the packaging and transportation. Make it make sense. 2) Does that mean that this type of agriculture somehow physically hinders the displacement of ecosystems? How does that work?

[@dcfromthev]

You should do a detailed video on what average people can do to lower their emissions. And not just focus on fossil fuels but also agriculture, food systems, and other proactive solutions that are far less discussed on this topic. Thanks for your work it is important!

[@BiggusFroggus]

Is that the set for Games Night? Anyway good video as allways Simon! I hope more people take the time to think before they act

[@stewartjones2173]

Areas inside woodlands are noticeably cooler on hot days.

[@JakeRichardsong]

JustDiggit also does tree restoration.