You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: 20 Million Trees from the sky!

in #science2 years ago

I planted trees before, and I enjoy them for many reasons.
Many of these 20 million trees will die long before maturity, if the seeds sprout at all.
Most of these areas look like they were recently deforested for the production of 'renewable resources' and 'green energy'.
There are legitimate concerns that publicity stunts to raise awareness and take action are not a particularly effective means of solving issues.


You say that, and I also ask that question. AND YET the Thai government has reforested HUGE areas (millions of acres) dropping seeds into previously logged and difficult to access areas. It is the nature of seeds that a flower produces hundreds in the hope of the one reaching maturity. The technique has been used for almost 10 years here with great results, although they do it slightly differently, and make little "seed bombs" first.

My original point was Mr. Beast didn't plant anywhere close to 20million trees. They planted 1000 seedlings and scattered around 19,998,000 seeds. Facts are facts. We have no clue about the success rate, but we do know that 20million trees will not offset very much human activity even if all of them reach maturity.

A young forest, growing up from drone-deposited seeds, here in northern Thailand, is still a few years away

Cool, but the results in this article are simply people getting excited about a nice-sounding idea with no results. They are simply stating that shrinkingly around seeds from drones is much faster than planting seedlings, and there is room for improvement. I'm not going to argue against that.

I've planted seedlings before, 95% died before reaching maturity. Even the professionals go at a 6:1 ratio for easy to grow native species. I can imagine sprinkling seeds from drones results in a failure rate of closer to 99.9%.

They mention using different methods. Perhaps planting a few trees of various sizes and preparing the land somehow to encourage regrowth would be best.

The professionals have been experimenting with reforestation with intense economic interest for decades. They should be teaching people who don't do this about sustainable forest management. However, the problem is most people clearing forests simply want them gone to use the land more productively.

We are focusing on the wrong end of the problem here.