Is clear cutting forests a solution for excess carbon?

Mature trees don't grow and they use very little co2. Younger trees grow fast and consume much more co2.





Would it be a good concept to cut down mature forests and plant young trees in the cleared area, while using the trees for homes and furniture where the carbon would be sequestered for years?





Could clear cutting be the solution to higher carbon levels?Is clear cutting forests a solution for excess carbon?
Makes more sense than most of the other solutions offered. But I don't think it needs a solution.





It certainly makes more sense than ';Artificial trees';Is clear cutting forests a solution for excess carbon?
Your lack of knowledge is, as in the past wide, old large trees have leaves usually quite large leaf cover unless it is dead a tree never stops growing whether it is evergreen or looses its leaves it uses a considerable amount of carbon. Yes younger trees do grow fast but their total mass is tiny compared to a fully grown tree which may be 100s of times the mass of a 5 year old sapling.


What you know about biology is as weak as what you know about climate.
The problem with your solution is that the old trees have locked up the carbon. Cutting them down would start the decay process where the carbon is released back in to the atmosphere.


For a better solution you'd want to plant something that locks up carbon in a currently deforested or grassy area.
';Bio-Char'; is also supposed to help improve the soil.





but clear-cutting on slopes might lead to erosion, and loss of capability to regrow trees.





Edit: from WikiPedia: ';whole woody regions were over-harvested, as in Spain, where this contributed to the paradoxical weakening of the domestic economy';


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestati鈥?/a>
Who told u that old tress require less co2? U should provide proof to back up ur statement.


I think there are better things to do than cutting old trees. I would never cut a tree even if ur theory is right. May be people using public transport instead of their big, fat, polluting cars would be a better thing to do.
Interesting thought. However, by doing this you would be destroying animal habitats and increasing the volume of rainwater that would run-off these areas and could cause extensive soil erosion and increased water flow and siltation in receiving rivers.
The best solution is mixed planting and harvesting mature trees at the peak of their growing years. Wide clear cutting is always a bad idea.
If the trees were replanted, then yes, it would absorb more carbon from the air. but do not the lefties hear you say that or they will need to get more sand to bury their heads in.





Of course, it's not about carbon or rising temps. it's about killing capitalism and the free market.
interesting i did not know that. i do know people don't replace tress, never follow the rule take down a tree, plant a tree. well i know we certainly lacking trees to heal the atmosphere.