Planting Forests for Carbon Sequestration

[NoOneMan]

1. I am skeptical of any reforestry effort driven by for-profit industry

Are they worried about the ecosystem and biodiversity, or the largest quantity of trees they can purchase for the least amount of money, planted with the most efficient techniques.

Forests developed through a complex interaction of organisms over 3.5+ billion years. How can humans maximize carbon-capture effectiveness without even attempting to replicate the diverse and complicated systems we find in nature? A tree is more than a single organism in a vacuum. They depend on healthy soil, fertilized by a healthy ecosystem full of diverse animals and supplied by vast colonies of beneficial mycelium. A forest isn't simple a place where there are a lot of trees. A forest is a system in which trees and other wildlife flourish. How can we even effectively repair the earth if we are not focused on the actual system as a whole? We are always looking for the easy ways out.

It sound like this effort will produce Wal-Mart forests. Lots of trees with little substance. I will be very surprised if its carbon capturing abilities in practice match the amount of carbon they are supposed to be sequestering.

FYI: I am very pro tree planting and reforestation. It may be the only real "tool" humans have to easily combat climate change. Shifting agricultural dependence to woody perennials would also vastly help build resilience and transition society to a lower-energy world. But I don't see a one-size fits all cookie cutter forest approach as the necessary answer, especially when it is only being done in the spirit of enabling more production.