Please invest in Our Daily Planet today, by making a one time or monthly contribution.
We do not charge our readers a subscription fee for our content. We want to continue to grow our readership, particularly among millennials and public servants. Voluntary contributions from readers will help us employ interns and freelance journalists, expand our content, and reach a larger audience.
Tree planting seems like a straightforward, positive climate solution: plant trees to soak up carbon, green urban spaces, reduce heat. However, in Sweden, nearly a fifth of the country’s ancient growth forests have been cut down since 2000 as part of the country’s timber products sector. While most of these trees have been replanted, they’re replaced with monoculture timber plantations. But these trees aren’t interchangeable, the Guardian reports. As a group of Swedish environmental organizations, indigenous communities, and youth activists wrote to the European Commission, ‘Natural forests are not renewable. Trees can be planted, but not forests. . .If you plant pine trees, you get a timber field, not a forest. Real forests are complex ecosystems, a bedrock of a multitude of life and home for many species”
Why This Matters: The Swedish forestry model causes many of the same harms as deforestation even with no tree replacement. It disrupts ecosystems: The old-growth forests host lichens, which in turn are an important food for reindeer. More than 70% of the country’s lichen-filled forests have been destroyed since 1960, impacting the indigenous Sámi people whose culture is linked to the reindeer. It also fragments the forests that do remain, destroying much of their ecosystem services — not really a good replacement at all.
Using the Forest for Fuel
Sweden’s low levels of protected forestland coupled with the intensity of logging threaten to destroy the country’s ancient forests, but protecting the old-growth forests that remain would be positive for the species — including humans — that depend on the forest as well as our carbon budget.
As the letter notes, the time to rein in emissions is running out, and swapping one carbon-intense source of fuel for another doesn’t solve the crisis. “Forest protection is a cost-effective and immediate carbon capture and sequestration tool,” they write, but you need the ancient forests still standing to protect in the first place. The timber plantation trees planted today will take 60-100 years to reach the point where they sequester the same amount of carbon dioxide emitted from cutting down the old-growth trees there, to begin with.
The state of California is already warning, that due to the 2-year ongoing drought, this year’s fire season could be worse than last. Overall, more than 6,390 square miles burned in 10,431 wildfires in California in 2020 — it was the largest wildfire season recorded in California’s modern history. Five of the state’s largest wildfires happened last year. […]
Corporations attempting to reduce their carbon footprint in the short run are restoring forests as a way of offsetting the carbon they release into the atmosphere. But some of these initiatives may be less effective than advertised. They are alleged to have inflated the amount of carbon saved from corporate ownership or claimed to protect land that was never under threat of logging.
Our Daily Planet is your daily dose of the stories shaping our world and the ways that you can take action. From the climate crisis to the protection of biodiversity, if these issues matter to you then please subscribe & stay informed!
Your privacy is Important! We promise never to use your email address to send you spam or advertisements.