Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
Absurd extension of absurd science
Page 1 of 2 next>
Dec 4, 2012 21:15:29   #
mlj Loc: Anderson, SC
 
I have been involved in science and science teaching for many years. I do not consider myself an "extreme" environmentalist. But I do believe that people should do whatever is reasonable to insure our quality of water, air, and natural resources.

Having said that, I began (with sarcasm) a discussion with some people the other day. I told them that the EPA was considering proposing pushing legislation that would eliminate the use of "real" trees as Christmas decorations for homes. I explained my reasoning through the "research" that the destruction of rainforests is creating more atmospheric greenhouse gases. I suggested that, banning the destruction of Christmas trees would help reduce global warming.

It was amazing at the different responses I received. Most agreed that the destruction of rainforests causes increases in greenhouse gases and an increase in global warming, but they would not go so far as to agree to ban the destruction of millions and millions of varieties of pine trees.

I am curious as to what the UHH community thinks.

Reply
Dec 4, 2012 21:36:00   #
NOSLEEP Loc: Calgary
 
If you take the time to look on google earth. Have a look North to Canada.
What do you see? Its good idea to scroll in at the Earth with the slider if you like. Have a good look around the Planet. What do you see? The GREEN you see is TREES. More trees than you could ever know what to do with. Most Christmas trees today come from Christmas Tree farms. The good people that make a living from planting and farming Christmas Trees every year think you must be insane...

Reply
Dec 5, 2012 01:26:45   #
SteveR Loc: Michigan
 
While natural trees have a life cycle and reproduce themselves, as well as becoming mulch after the Christmas season, artifical trees are not as eco-friendly as one might think. Aluminum requires 17.4 megawatt hours of electricity to produce one metric ton, so the artificial frames already contribute to global pollution and warming. Now, where do you think all those plastic pine needles come from? Petroleum. A further drag on natural resources. And just what happens to that artificial tree when discarded? Does it break down into biologically useful products as the natural tree does? No, it goes into the landfill and fills up space in an ever growing pile of garbage. So, give me my eco-friendly Michigan blue spruce every year

Reply
 
 
Dec 5, 2012 02:05:50   #
Pepper Loc: Planet Earth Country USA
 
I don't know how many pine trees you'll see in the rain forest, not many would be my guess.

Reply
Dec 5, 2012 02:15:37   #
Danilo Loc: Las Vegas
 
I'm going to vote for the natural Christmas Trees. At least they don't come from China!
As to "rain forests", I've read about people who have cleared land for growing crops in the rain forest only to find there are not enough hours in the day to prevent the forest growing back while they are trying to grow crops! Okay?

Reply
Dec 5, 2012 07:05:45   #
rayford2 Loc: New Bethlehem, PA
 
SteveR wrote:
While natural trees have a life cycle and reproduce themselves, as well as becoming mulch after the Christmas season, artifical trees are not as eco-friendly as one might think. Aluminum requires 17.4 megawatt hours of electricity to produce one metric ton, so the artificial frames already contribute to global pollution and warming. Now, where do you think all those plastic pine needles come from? Petroleum. A further drag on natural resources. And just what happens to that artificial tree when discarded? Does it break down into biologically useful products as the natural tree does? No, it goes into the landfill and fills up space in an ever growing pile of garbage. So, give me my eco-friendly Michigan blue spruce every year
While natural trees have a life cycle and reproduc... (show quote)


We don't buy an artificial tree every year. The one we're using this season was purchased in 1998 and the few battle scars it has are easily covered with decoration.
It hasn't made it to the landfill yet.

Reply
Dec 5, 2012 07:17:34   #
SteveR Loc: Michigan
 
rayford2 wrote:
SteveR wrote:
While natural trees have a life cycle and reproduce themselves, as well as becoming mulch after the Christmas season, artifical trees are not as eco-friendly as one might think. Aluminum requires 17.4 megawatt hours of electricity to produce one metric ton, so the artificial frames already contribute to global pollution and warming. Now, where do you think all those plastic pine needles come from? Petroleum. A further drag on natural resources. And just what happens to that artificial tree when discarded? Does it break down into biologically useful products as the natural tree does? No, it goes into the landfill and fills up space in an ever growing pile of garbage. So, give me my eco-friendly Michigan blue spruce every year
While natural trees have a life cycle and reproduc... (show quote)


We don't buy an artificial tree every year. The one we're using this season was purchased in 1998 and the few battle scars it has are easily covered with decoration.
It hasn't made it to the landfill yet.
quote=SteveR While natural trees have a life cycl... (show quote)


That is making the best possible outcome out of this situation. Stretch it's oug as much as possible considering the strain on resources that it cost to produce. The longer you use it, too, keeps it out of the landfill. They don't mulch aluminum and fake pine needles, you know.

Reply
 
 
Dec 5, 2012 07:59:21   #
bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.
 
Danilo wrote:
I'm going to vote for the natural Christmas Trees. At least they don't come from China!
As to "rain forests", I've read about people who have cleared land for growing crops in the rain forest only to find there are not enough hours in the day to prevent the forest growing back while they are trying to grow crops! Okay?


not only that,but rain forrest are bad for farming.

Reply
Dec 5, 2012 08:03:28   #
TimS Loc: GA
 
As another poster alluded to, live Christmas trees generally come from farms where people PAY MONEY to grow them. If they could no longer sell their trees then they would stop planting them.

This is such a silly idea that I can't help but think it is more of a war against Christmas than anything else.

Reply
Dec 5, 2012 08:18:07   #
Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.
 
mlj wrote:
I have been involved in science and science teaching for many years. I do not consider myself an "extreme" environmentalist. But I do believe that people should do whatever is reasonable to insure our quality of water, air, and natural resources.

Having said that, I began (with sarcasm) a discussion with some people the other day. I told them that the EPA was considering proposing pushing legislation that would eliminate the use of "real" trees as Christmas decorations for homes. I explained my reasoning through the "research" that the destruction of rainforests is creating more atmospheric greenhouse gases. I suggested that, banning the destruction of Christmas trees would help reduce global warming.

It was amazing at the different responses I received. Most agreed that the destruction of rainforests causes increases in greenhouse gases and an increase in global warming, but they would not go so far as to agree to ban the destruction of millions and millions of varieties of pine trees.

I am curious as to what the UHH community thinks.
I have been involved in science and science teachi... (show quote)


Most of the Christmas trees that find their way into homes are farmed trees so they are replaced... I am not so sure that banning Christmas trees would have much impact nor am I sure that our crop of Christmas trees is comparative in scale to the destruction of the rain forest.

Reply
Dec 5, 2012 08:24:59   #
TimS Loc: GA
 
Might as well ban the sale of cheese because cheese comes from cows who contribute to global warming by their methane production.

Yeah. Makes about as much sense.

The key question is whether the government has the right to restrict INTRAstate commerce. Even an armchair lawyer knows Congress doesn't have that right and, by extension, neither does the EPA.

They can regulate interstate commerce so they can do things to make it harder for me to buy a spruce grown in VA but then the next question is whether the govt SHOULD do that just because they have the power to do it. You have a perfectly legal product that isn't harming anyone that someone grows, cuts down, and sells for a profit so they can survive.

Reply
 
 
Dec 5, 2012 08:35:09   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
The question I would have, is "how much CO2 do Pine trees process as opposed to deciduous trees?"...As others have said, most commercially available ones are grown on "farms", so for every one cut down, another is planted to replace it. Personally, I'm against clear cutting forests, but Pine tree sales at Christmas?...Nah, it's not a problem...

Reply
Dec 5, 2012 08:35:36   #
RichieC Loc: Adirondacks
 
I live in the country and know many Christmas tree farmers. The window of opportunity of a typical Christmas tree to be of proper size is about 6 - 10 years or so. This is a rare occurrence in the wild, along the edges of mature pine forests and would have to be perfectly shapped. . Is this where you think Christmas trees come from? You'd have to walk many miles to find the right place. Farmers plant them in rows, not too close, and every years travel up and down the rows trimming them here and there so they will be the right shape. IN all that time, they were converting carbon dioxide into oxygen. As soon as it is cut, new ones are planted. It's a farm!

This is a ridiculous discussion between people who think steak comes from foam trays and wrapped in plastic.

Unless you are prepared to eat fake celery to protect the rainforest.. look into where Christmas trees come from.

doh!

Reply
Dec 5, 2012 08:56:53   #
wrr Loc: SEK
 
would like to read where the EPA is considering what the op states...
this article puts the real vs fake in a better light
http://earth911.com/news/2010/11/29/real-vs-artificial-christmas-trees/

Reply
Dec 5, 2012 09:18:23   #
Bruce with a Canon Loc: Islip
 
We have a poster at work mentioning saving paper SAVES TREES. The thing forgotten is people PLANT TREES to harvest for paper.
NH alone has lost at least 3 papermills in the past few years. Therefore all the trees they palnted for eventual harvest live on, thousands of acres of trees unharvested because the requirement for paper has diminshed.
With those mill closings thiousands of jobs were lost.
Unfortunate as it is, there are no jobs to replace mill jobs in northern NH.
Small towns up there are dying.
SAVE A TREE my arse

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.