When tree planting hurts the climate

It's us, hi. We're the problem. It's us. Get better at solving problems with free access to Brilliant for 30 days: www.brilliant.org/simonclark
Tree planting initiatives! Politicians, activists, and KZbinrs love them, but the scientific literature is much more ambivalent. Failure rates are high. Damage is done to the local (and sometimes the global) environment. Is it possible to plant trees and have a positive impact? Absolutely! But there is another, arguably better way...
Justdiggit: justdiggit.org/
REFERENCES
1. onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/a...
2. apps.worldagroforestry.org/do...
3. www.theguardian.com/world/202...
4. e360.yale.edu/features/phanto...
5. www.wetlands.org/case-study/m...
6. www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/11/9/938
7. www.vox.com/down-to-earth/226...
8. www.science.org/doi/10.1126/s...
9. www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/l...
10. terravidaacademy.com/the-envi...
11. www.jamhoor.org/read/2018/2/8...
12. www.nature.com/articles/s4146...
13. www.science.org/doi/full/10.1...
14. academic.oup.com/bioscience/a...
15. www.frontiersin.org/journals/...
16. www.science.org/doi/10.1126/s...
PATREON
You can support the channel by becoming a patron at / simonoxfphys
--------- II ---------
More about me www.simonoxfphys.com/
My second channel - / simonclarkerrata
Threads - www.threads.net/@simonoxfphys
Instagram - / simonoxfphys
Twitch - / drsimonclark
--------- II ---------
Music by Epidemic Sound: nebula.tv/epidemic
Some stock footage courtesy of Getty.
Edited by Luke Negus.
When tree planting goes wrong. How can tree planting hurt the climate? Does planting trees help fix climate change? Will Team Trees actually help the climate? In this video I talk through how tree planting initiatives often fail and can damage the local and global environment. Fortunately scientists have worked out guidelines for such projects to follow to make a positive impact.
Huge thanks to my supporters on Patreon:
Norm Zemke, David Mann, Ben Thayer, Eric A Gentzler, Glen Monks, Daniel Chen, Gary Stark, dryfrog, Marcus Bosshard, Peter Reid, bitreign33 .
Bastian Pranzas, Lucas Johnston, Jeffry ., Whitefang, Marius Kießling, Jon Arlov, Pawel Piwek, Matze, Artem Plotnikov, Paul H and Linda L, Dan Sherman, Andy Hartley.
Claudia Kapp, Cy 'kkm' K'Nelson, Baerbel Winkler, OldGreyWolf, Oscar Hoffmann, Steamrollerman , Andy Parr, Ricky Jones, Guy Markey, Nicholas Hamdorf, Katharina Hartmuth, Mark Phillips, Jor Eero Raico Svederic, KJ Xiao, Martin Sinclair, Matt Beer DFC, Tschäff Reisberg, Tobias Ahsbahs, James Gaskell, Denis Kovachev, Michael Thomas, Victor Gordan, Joona Mäkinen, Tanner , Dominik Rihak, Nico Casal, Laura Glismann, Mark Harper, Ryan, Inten, Tyler Schwartz, John, James Haigh, Rick Kenny, Bailey Cook, Sergio Diaz, Command Chat, Aisolon, Christopher Mullin, I'm stuck in a PhD and I blame Simon., Joseph , Nicklas Kulp, Thomas Newman, Anže Cesar, Josef Probst, Kevin B, Phineas, Ishaan Shah, AngryPanda, Circuitrinos, Mark Richardson, Brian Moss, Hampus Sandell, Thomas Miller, Knut Nesheim, Dajeni, AYS , Forever Bulking, Kim Parnset, Crisan Talpes, Ted CLAY, Mike, Seb Stott, xawt, Diederik Jekel, Fuzzy Leapfrog, Jan-Willem Goedmakers, Samat Galimov, Ashley Hauck, Nico, Thibault , GGH, FireFerretDann, Ciotka Cierpienia, Sam, szigyi, Marcin Wrochna, Tom Painter, Phil Saici, Tom Marsh, Ashley Steel, Simone, Tomás Garnier Artiñano, Steffan , Adam Gillard, Christopher Hall, Miguel Cabrera Brufau, Sylvus , Florian Thie, James Gurney, Eddy Torres, Clemens, Andy Giesen, Jacob Speelman, Robin Anne McDuff, Jean-Marc Giffin, Cifer, Felix Winkler, Christian Weckner, Quinn Sinclair, Ebraheem Farag, Thomas Charbonnel, Sekhalis, Mark Moore, Philipp Legner, Zoey O'Neill, Justin Warren, Heijde, Trevor Berninger, streetlights, Gabriele Siino, David Mccann, Leonard Neamtu, James Leadbetter, Rapssack, Matthew Powell, Adrian Sand, Morten Engsvang, Haris Karimjee, Alex, The Cairene on Caffeine, Cody VanZandt, Casandra “Kalamity Kas” Toledo, Igor Francetic, Daniel Irwin, Sean Richards, Michael B., Thusto , Lachlan Woods, Dan Hanvey, Andrea De Mezzo, Real Engineering.

[@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.

[@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.

[@WallebyDamned]

You're not sponsored, you just Dig It

[@OrangeBarnacle]

Missed opportunity!

[@AB-fh9zh]

Nice.

[@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.

[@brotherlucker]

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.

[@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.

[@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 !!!

[@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.

[@YourCapyBro_windows95_3DPipes]

​@@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]

@@YourCapyBro_windows95_3DPipes 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.

[@YourCapyBro_windows95_3DPipes]

​@@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.

[@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!!

[@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.

[@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.

[@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?

[@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

[@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*

[@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.

[@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..

[@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

[@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!

[@noahchars849]

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

[@Agathe_Wassmann84]

your videos are really amazing, i can't imagine how much effort you have put in it😌

[@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!

[@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.

[@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!

[@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

[@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.

[@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

[@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.

[@inregionecaecorum]

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

[@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

[@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!

[@Conus426]

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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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'

[@kanoaika]

Yes! More people need to know about this stuff. People need to know that you don't get out of these kinds of problems with lazy mass production of trees so you can list big numbers, the only solutions that will really work in the end are the ones that take the time to observe and adapt to the needs of the local people and environment. Everything here is fundamentally about systems and you will have a low chance of being able to improve anything long term if you don't understand systems. Mimicking the superficial form of a desired natural system and expecting it to become a properly functional self sustaining one (i.e. to be alive) is as futile as trying to make a living person by haphazardly sticking together body parts (and that is a generous one because most of these people don't even get the right parts): the parts without the working system are doomed. The projects that I see do the most good are the ones that are based on permaculture style principles. They focus working with the local population to find systemic solutions that not only fit the local environmental conditions and land, but crucially uplift and directly benefit the local people in highly tangible ways. It is only when the the people around value and know how to protect and manage things to work with the environment that you get a natural system that will last and benefit us and the world around us. In addition to project mentioned in this video, another very large scale, properly oriented, and successful project is being done by the Paani foundation in India (www.paanifoundation.in/) who has been working to mobilize, teach, and organize tons of local people across rural areas from thousands of villages in parts of India to build enormous numbers of water harvesting structures. They have been able to help thousands of villages solve their own water issues by training them to build water harvesting structures (they didn't have enough for the year and wells, their primary source, were drying up because monsoon rains were mainly going as runoff to the ocean rather than recharging the ground water well). Then after they solve the water issue, they build upon it helping lead projects to manage grasslands for grazing, establish well adapted trees in a way that helps the people and environment, manage soil in sustainable ways for their agriculture, while seeking to increase all families income as they go by teaching them sustainable farming/land management practices. The effects of their projects are clear as they have worked on building systems that regenerate the environment while helping the people (for instance it allows them to stay there all year curbing mass migration to and from mega-cities driven by water scarcity, increased food yields, and brought back wildlife that had not been present for years). This is the kind of stuff people need to be doing; mindlessly tossing money at these kinds of problems it not the way to solve them. There are lots of other similar projects on many different scales. For people who want to see some of these, Andrew Millison (www.youtube.com/@amillison) has a channel that features many of them from around the world.

[@gandalfandferg280]

I'm from New Zealand where plantings are very common. There are some major problems. They are often used for greenwashing. They are neglected afted plantings and so weeds take over or they are eaten by invasive deer. They are often only a handful of species that are sometimes not even native to the area.(done large scale so not catered to local species). They are planted so closs together! They form a canopy quickly but they form a low diversity understory. I think funding is better used for weeding or pest control here, not that i haven't seen good plantings. You're better off fencing off an area from browsers and allowing natural regen(large scale). This has been done a bunch and nature is great at rewilding itself as long as you control weeds. There are some other benefits to planting trees that isnt mentioned here. Trees can provide habitat for animals including fish if riparian. Forests will reduce run off and sedimentation into the river and marine environments.

[@cinemaipswich4636]

The reason that Forests have high rainfall is that forests create Pollen. Those tiny little things float in the air and capture raindrops. That is why rain-forests exist.

[@BoringAngler]

Not even done watching and this video has already explained the problem more effectively than 2-3 articles I've read from sympathetic journalistic outlets that were weighed down by jargon.

[@patrick247two]

Don't plant trees, just leave the ground alone. The trees will come.

[@SiqueScarface]

My mother used to say: Your planting work is successful, if afterwards, you can't tell there was any work done recently.

[@brotherlucker]

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.

[@--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.

[@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.

[@kendrajohnson6535]

Thank you, Simon. Great to hear about Justdiggit.

[@eric2500]

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

[@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.

[@newscoulomb3705]

People often overlook the natural diversity of the forest when undertaking mass tree plantings. Even the US Forest Service would replant large, homogenous stands of trees that, surprise, surprise, just happened to be the most profitable species for the logging industry.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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

[@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.

[@brettgoldsmith9971]

This is a really good and nuanced video. The target audience is current and frequent donors to climate causes. I am sure it will confuse a few people, but I doubt the algorthim so good at putting people in bubbles will show this to too many climate skeptics. Anyone disagree?

[@robertbooth3699]

USFS data show that an average of 60% mortality is to be expected in any tree reforestation project.

[@lilygreenall2837]

I use Ecosia - they seem pretty legit.

[@RonaldoMoura]

Before emissions there is another problem that only few people are talking about: there is to many homo sapiens in this planet. If we keep growing population doesn't make any difference if we stop using fossil fuel and became all vegans. it will just transfer the problem to another place. A really good book on this topic is A Planet of 3 Billion: Mapping Humanity's Long History of Ecological Destruction and Finding Our Way to a Resilient Future by Christopher Tucker

[@janejenkins5137]

One of the things we do here in Wales is just fence off an area so sheep can't get to the saplings, the trees come up naturally.

[@jpj1115]

The point about albedo also applies to solar panels - if planting trees is bad, solar panels are even worse

[@pipertripp]

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

[@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!!!

[@caine7024]

Really enjoyed this video! That charity seems brilliant

[@MoonlightWalnut]

So grateful to see you talking about this topic, this is something I always go on about to my friends after studying it briefly at undergraduate and now learning more about it at postgrad!

[@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.

[@henryharris7745]

Love the work mate, I get educated a lot on some of these important issues

[@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!!

[@DobrinWorld]

Thank you! ❤

[@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.

[@sightline4004]

3:22 "such as the loss of land for agriculture", In the US only 37% of cropland is used for food.

[@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.

[@maxresdefault_]

It's a shame that maintaining existing forests is so much less exciting than planting millions of trees. Both are super important, but one is arguably more impactful more often.

[@hattielankford4775]

Well done, sir.

[@FabiWann]

Shoutout to MossyEarth?

[@--Paws--]

2:02 Also the fact that saplings need shelter from too much exposure. Some plants are not as tolerant of the environment, ironically and will bake under the sun, dry out from the wind, etc. Forests are a gift that keeps on giving in which taller plants protect or take the brunt of the weather and other effects away from the growing sapling. Of course not all plants are as sensitive yet it seems many who plant such plants don't take in to account such factors.

[@rathpichyangkura1837]

People plant them and expect nature to take care of them. You have to take care of them because nature is changing. In some places, the environment has changed so much that it cannot support the growth. We are just a part of this whole system and if we continue to think that we are Separated and put ourselves apart. We will never see the whole picture.

[@boaznash847]

It's hard enough to get excited about a given climate solution. Being told it's generally not very helpful is really frustrating.

[@jenskoning7687]

Solid rundown of the discussion.

[@user-bp8yg3ko1r]

No one: Fossil fuel companies in their sustainability reports: 04:48 Except "We'll come back to that point" actually means: It's in the fine print of the fine print.

[@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.

[@Raggart]

Loving the new studio!

[@redrockcrf4663]

I find this so frustrating to discuss because there are plenty of cases to plant trees to kickstart re-growth. Change of land use overall is a large part of total greenhouse emissions for several countries. I know in my country this really means re-wilding, with original forest types. Many people and organsiations are trying to get non-productive, previously clear-felled land, to return to the natural state. Part of the problem is the land is on Private land. The farmers recognise that some of their land is unproductive, but they're not going to spend money to change it, because they struggle remain in business. But it is happening. I see lot of previous sheep and cattle land high up returning to native forest, but as many of you point out, that is not anything like enough to reverse climate change. But I don't see it as a bad thing either.

[@bobbobby3085]

Keep going Dr. Clark this has been another great video

[@sebastianjost]

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

[@poom323]

Even planting indigenous species tree can still cause harm rather than benefit, if it isn't right amount or right ratio.

[@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.

[@OldShatterham]

Didn't think the failure rate of tree planting projects was that high...

[@boaznash847]

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

[@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.

[@DenjelxD]

Good video! Learned something new. Thank you ^^

[@AndrewMorris-wz1vq]

I really dig Just Dig It's grass roots campaign.

[@CaptainBlitz]

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

[@fishyerik]

Great video! Funny thing about trees, they tend to grow if they are given the opportunity. So, there's definitely too much focus on the planting part, which isn't even always necessary, and not even always beneficial for long term success. About the change in albedo, I skimmed a bit in that paper, they seem to base the estimates on constant "blue sky" conditions, which seems odd, maybe I got that part wrong. Anyway, the change in albedo can absolutely have a significant warming effect, but it is also more complicated than that. For one thing, trees still sequester carbon, which is very important long term. Also, water that evaporates from the trees can increase precipitation elsewhere, in part where it's very much needed. So trees in areas that has plenty of water can potentially have very significant positive effects on other areas. And then there are all the other aspects, like ecosystem effects, and what happens to the trees, if they are eventually used to replace carbon intensive materials, like concrete, or to produce things like biochar they can have much more positive impact than "just" the carbon they sequester.

[@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!

[@juliahello6673]

What is the carbon footprint of planting a tree?

[@knpark2025]

What I know as a South Korean is that tree planting cannot, even with all the benefits, solve anything without a well-planned, long-term commitment. In the mid-1900s South Korea's reforestation effort had little to do with carbon sinks or climate crisis, but rather more about flood mitigation and resource management. And sometimes the government used the funds for planting new trees to build new coal briquette factories instead. Burning more coal to grow forests was justified at that time because by changing most people's everyday fuel source into coal people no longer needed firewood. It would take a few more decades for coal as an indoor fuel source to be also replaced by natural gas, but during all those years people needed less firewood, and newly planted trees could grow relatively unimpeded. Both national and local government authorities have been meticulously managing reforested areas for several decades: first to maximize the survival rate of young trees, and later to facilitate the forest's evolution into more stable biomes. I don't expect my country's forest to ever make a dent in the amount of net carbon this country emits. Nevertheless, it *does* make a huge difference and this country is better off thanks to those forests. Even if the forest doesn't sequester carbon as much as we would want it to, it will still have a final say in heavy rain, which is a huge boon for mitigating the effects of extreme weathers. South Korea has similar if not more annual rainfall compared to North Korea, but it's the North that suffers much worse floods than the South. You can't live in South Korea and not be a tree-vangelist, at least when it is going through the first few weeks of Korean Jangma (East Asian Rainy Season) right now.

[@jamesknapp64]

Fantastic video with nuance

[@rivermundcatradora7061]

I love the information in this video, especially since I have a feeling I can use some of the tree restoration papers linked for something I'm working on at the moment -- I live in the Philippines, and fairly close by is a watershed whose level of forestation has fluctuated over the years -- but I also love recognizing the studio where the Justdiggit representative was being interviewed xD

[@Debbie-henri]

Yes, it's a shame that some of these planting projects don't incorporate lighter coloured trees. In Australia, there are plenty of Eucalypts tailor made for lighter coloured plantings, many Gum frees having a reflective 'sheen' on those leaves... A pity they make the best firewood in the world. However, Pyrus salicifolia (otherwise known as the Silver Pear, also available in a weeping form: Pyrus salicifolia pendula) is a highly attractive ornamental tree, suitable for gardens for anyone who wants to help 'reflect' away heat accumulating on their property. I have several rare trees called Abies concolor 'Swift's Silver' that do a wonderful job of producing a silver/very pale green foliage. It's really quite slow growing for the first 15 years, making it fine for medium gardens. Only after the 15 year mark has it started to ramp up its growing speed a little, but it is possible to nip out the tips of pines to stop them getting out of control if you so desire). Despite originating in New Mexico, these trees are doing fine here in Scotland, doesn't mind the rain and whatever snow and cold comes our way (has happily survived down to -20C without a twitch). A number of Willow species also have very light leaves. I have 2 slow growing silver leaved Willows (names unknown, given as cuttings). But commoner species also have light leaves and are ideal for riparian woodlands. Sorbus species have a number of light coloured/silver leaved varieties, and have berries that are attractive to birds, while a few have berries that are edible for humans (in case, you are a practicing permaculturist). The beauty of having certain willows and Sorbus in the garden, their branches can be bent into shape to make tunnels and shades in a garden environment, thus cooling pathways and seating areas. Also, don't forget Birch and Poplars. While Poplars are mostly for the larger garden/landscape. Birch can be grown in medium gardens, and kept coppiced or pollarded in smaller gardens. While their leaves aren't necessary white/all white, some species do have a shiny, reflective side. There is no place cooler in my garden than the little Birch avenue I planted. Plus, of course, the trunks of Silver Birch are whitish, and the Japanese White Birch is a startling pure white colour. (The birch offers little songbirds plenty of seeds in Autumn, and there must be little bugs and spiders libing among them too. They always seem to be thronging with life). I always think that people shouldn't forget that even though darker green trees do change the albedo index - trees do shade the ground, keeping it cool in the hottest of days. Now, while the darker tree leaves may heat up a very, very little during the day. As soon as it is night or goes cloudy, that heat is gone. If the sun shines on even pale coloured bare soil, it soaks up that heat, dries out the moisture while it does so, and that heat is 'still' there of a night, pouring back out to maintain atmospheric heat. Tree leaves just don't do that, because they are converting so much of that sunlight energy into useful food. So, yes, they raise the albedo, but no they are not allowing the ground to become a heat battery in their stead. So, they are better than nothing. We can't all plant just silver trees as a quick fix and expect a balanced environment. We can only increase their number to a certain degree. I think that the emphasis should be on tree after are than merely planting numbers though I have planted around 10,000 trees over the course of a lifetime, which is far less than many professsional tree planters. However, I look after my trees afterwards. I water them again and again over the course of how many years it takes before I am assured completely of their independence. They need protection from animals too. Deer are an absolute nuisance where I live. So I've had to use a number of strategies to discourage them. Doesn't always work (lost 20 trees last year, despite tree guards. Deer are working them out). My success rate, despite my care, is not 100%, more like 60-70%. (It's got better the more I've learned). And yes, I can understand why Africans would favour caring for useful, fruit bearing trees and neglecting natives that are of no consequence to them. When you live in such a hot environment, where water has to be carried sometimes great distances, it costs much more energy to work than if you lived in a temperate environment. So, you are not going to slog your guts out caring for something that is never going to repay you for your diligence. When they have been provided with fruit bearing plants, their aftercare success rate is really high - 85% in at least some places. Thing is, keep giving them more and more fruit trees, more than they can possibly use, the native tree seedlings will arrive and germinate in between far flung fruit trees once the environment is right. It's a bit like the grassland I used to have here. To begin with, a solutely 'no' tree seedlings of any description would emerge in this grassland. A few around the edges, yes. But it's a crazy slow way of rewilding (and thatywhy I don't like the 'leave it and see' type rewilding method. It's going to take too long). When I began to plant a framework of trees (natives in a hedgerow, fruit and native trees here and there, slowly building a scheme), the spontaneous tree seedlings began to appear. This is because seed eating birds and animals largely don't like to cross expanses of open grass. They like to have shelter from predators, usually the flying sort. In my neighbour's woodland, the whole place is a mass of tree seedlings of all kinds - because the trees allow small seed eaters to creep about in secret and plant their stores. So African woodlands will only start as orchards. Things will even out in time.

[@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.

[@siltyroach1584]

Really well explained thanks

[@phil20_20]

The magic word is, "Reforestation." Who will give up their land to save the human race?

[@tissuewater]

In other words nature just corrects itself, in a way once climate change reaches a point where the planet becomes inhabitable for us that's also nature's process of "correction".

[@adityabaghaswara534]

What I think is that, you need preparation first cause each plants or trees has its own preferable or should I say optimal growth from its external factor, such as soil and also climate. I think better preparation is needed such as doing research on what sort of plants or trees that could grow in your own area. We could also assessing the type of soil to indicate whether is it good or not to plant a certain type of trees in a certain area