Trees absorb carbon dioxide, no one is disputing that, but could we put trees into a position where the amount of carbon dioxide taken out of the atmosphere be quadrupled in 100 years? A new research shows that if we replace steel and concrete that devours fossil fuels, which produces excess carbon dioxide, during manufacturing. Basically, the entire idea is replace products that contain a pathway of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels to the atmosphere in hopes of reducing the risk of global warming. This all could work out for everyone by harvesting forests, we are able to reduce the emissions but be able to replenish our resources. Unfortunately, this solution could increase the numbers of threatened animals since we could potentially tap into fragile ecosystems. I look forward to see a change in products from steel and concrete to wood in hopes of stopping global warming, even though many do not believe, it is best to be safe than sorry.
It is sort of a double edged sword. On one hand you have using steel and concrete, and with it the use of fossil fuels and carbon dioxide emissions. And then on the other hand you have using wood for products but then devouring forests and animal habitats along with it. I suppose the only thing we can do is weight the pros and cons of each, in both the short and long-term, and then choosing the better option. Or maybe even finding another alternative. I just hope the better and less costly option is pursued.
ReplyDelete