The overhaul of construction practices required for such a shift would require up to 149 million hectares of new timber plantations – and increased harvests from unprotected natural forests – but need not encroach on agricultural land, according to the Potsdam Institute for Climate Change paper Implications. Research (PIK). Housing 90% of the world’s growing urban population in tall wooden buildings could prevent 106 billion tonnes of carbon emissions by 2100, research says. Abhijeet Mishra, lead author of the paper, said: “More than half the world’s population lives in cities today, and by 2100 that number will increase significantly. This means more homes will be built with steel and concrete, most of which have a serious carbon footprint. But we have an alternative. We can house the new urban population in high-rise buildings – that is, four to 12 stories – made of wood.” The study, published in Nature Communications on Tuesday, is the first to analyze the scale of potential emissions cuts from a large-scale transition to “timber cities”. Using four different land-use scenarios, PIK scientists used the Magpie open-source global land-use model to explore the implications and practicalities of the ‘timber cities’ concept. Their reasoning was that wood has the lowest carbon footprint of any building material because the carbon dioxide absorbed during tree growth will not be emitted until the wood is eventually destroyed. Alexander Popp, co-author of the study, said preventing logging for timber in virgin forests and biodiversity conservation areas was crucial to their calculations. “The explicit protection of these protected areas is crucial, however, establishing timber plantations at the expense of other unprotected natural areas could further increase future biodiversity loss,” he said. Environmentalists, however, point out that the world’s 131 million hectares of tree plantations tend to be less biodiverse than natural forests and burn more easily. Sini Eräjää, head of Greenpeace’s European food and forests campaign, said it would be “a terrible idea” to cut down natural forests and replace them with wood plantations. “It would be a disaster for nature and the climate,” he said. “Natural, biodiverse forests are more resistant to drought, fire and disease, so they are a much safer carbon store than the tree plantations we’ve seen smoking this summer from Portugal to California. Wood can play a bigger role in construction, but doubling the world’s tree plantations at the expense of priceless nature is simply disappointing, when modest reductions in meat and dairy farming would free up much-needed land.” Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you to the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online advertising and content sponsored by external parties. For more information, see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Mishra accepted that wildlife loss will occur with tree plantations and called for “strong governance and careful planning to limit negative impacts on biodiversity”. “Biophysical risks”, such as the possibility of urban fires becoming more frequent, had not been assessed in the report, he added. Wood is still favored by U.S. homebuilders, but as wildfires have intensified amid worsening climate disruption, some are questioning the practice of building with flammable materials. Abhilash Panda, the deputy head of partnerships at the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction in Geneva, said: “Wood does offer benefits. It provides a carbon sink, reduces emissions and provides a way to deal with unmanaged forests. On the downside, it’s flammable. However, what matters most in determining fire risk is what type of dwelling is being considered, what the target is and what the location is. Risk is site specific and any design must build resilience into that.” About 15 billion trees are cut down worldwide every year right now. The planet’s tree population is thought to have nearly halved since the dawn of human civilization.
title: “Timber Cities Could Cut 100 Billion Tonnes Of Co2 Emissions By 2100 Environment Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-12” author: “Florence Nunlee”
The overhaul of construction practices required for such a shift would require up to 149 million hectares of new timber plantations – and increased harvests from unprotected natural forests – but need not encroach on agricultural land, according to the Potsdam Institute for Climate Change paper Implications. Research (PIK). Housing 90% of the world’s growing urban population in tall wooden buildings could prevent 106 billion tonnes of carbon emissions by 2100, research says. Abhijeet Mishra, lead author of the paper, said: “More than half the world’s population lives in cities today, and by 2100 that number will increase significantly. This means more homes will be built with steel and concrete, most of which have a serious carbon footprint. But we have an alternative. We can house the new urban population in high-rise buildings – that is, four to 12 stories – made of wood.” The study, published in Nature Communications on Tuesday, is the first to analyze the scale of potential emissions cuts from a large-scale transition to “timber cities”. Using four different land-use scenarios, PIK scientists used the Magpie open-source global land-use model to explore the implications and practicalities of the ‘timber cities’ concept. Their reasoning was that wood has the lowest carbon footprint of any building material because the carbon dioxide absorbed during tree growth will not be emitted until the wood is eventually destroyed. Alexander Popp, co-author of the study, said preventing logging for timber in virgin forests and biodiversity conservation areas was crucial to their calculations. “The explicit protection of these protected areas is crucial, however, establishing timber plantations at the expense of other unprotected natural areas could further increase future biodiversity loss,” he said. Environmentalists, however, point out that the world’s 131 million hectares of tree plantations tend to be less biodiverse than natural forests and burn more easily. Sini Eräjää, head of Greenpeace’s European food and forests campaign, said it would be “a terrible idea” to cut down natural forests and replace them with wood plantations. “It would be a disaster for nature and the climate,” he said. “Natural, biodiverse forests are more resistant to drought, fire and disease, so they are a much safer carbon store than the tree plantations we’ve seen smoking this summer from Portugal to California. Wood can play a bigger role in construction, but doubling the world’s tree plantations at the expense of priceless nature is simply disappointing, when modest reductions in meat and dairy farming would free up much-needed land.” Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you to the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online advertising and content sponsored by external parties. For more information, see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Mishra accepted that wildlife loss will occur with tree plantations and called for “strong governance and careful planning to limit negative impacts on biodiversity”. “Biophysical risks”, such as the possibility of urban fires becoming more frequent, had not been assessed in the report, he added. Wood is still favored by U.S. homebuilders, but as wildfires have intensified amid worsening climate disruption, some are questioning the practice of building with flammable materials. Abhilash Panda, the deputy head of partnerships at the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction in Geneva, said: “Wood does offer benefits. It provides a carbon sink, reduces emissions and provides a way to deal with unmanaged forests. On the downside, it’s flammable. However, what matters most in determining fire risk is what type of dwelling is being considered, what the target is and what the location is. Risk is site specific and any design must build resilience into that.” About 15 billion trees are cut down worldwide every year right now. The planet’s tree population is thought to have nearly halved since the dawn of human civilization.
title: “Timber Cities Could Cut 100 Billion Tonnes Of Co2 Emissions By 2100 Environment Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-05” author: “Evelyn Aleo”
The overhaul of construction practices required for such a shift would require up to 149 million hectares of new timber plantations – and increased harvests from unprotected natural forests – but need not encroach on agricultural land, according to the Potsdam Institute for Climate Change paper Implications. Research (PIK). Housing 90% of the world’s growing urban population in tall wooden buildings could prevent 106 billion tonnes of carbon emissions by 2100, research says. Abhijeet Mishra, lead author of the paper, said: “More than half the world’s population lives in cities today, and by 2100 that number will increase significantly. This means more homes will be built with steel and concrete, most of which have a serious carbon footprint. But we have an alternative. We can house the new urban population in high-rise buildings – that is, four to 12 stories – made of wood.” The study, published in Nature Communications on Tuesday, is the first to analyze the scale of potential emissions cuts from a large-scale transition to “timber cities”. Using four different land-use scenarios, PIK scientists used the Magpie open-source global land-use model to explore the implications and practicalities of the ‘timber cities’ concept. Their reasoning was that wood has the lowest carbon footprint of any building material because the carbon dioxide absorbed during tree growth will not be emitted until the wood is eventually destroyed. Alexander Popp, co-author of the study, said preventing logging for timber in virgin forests and biodiversity conservation areas was crucial to their calculations. “The explicit protection of these protected areas is crucial, however, establishing timber plantations at the expense of other unprotected natural areas could further increase future biodiversity loss,” he said. Environmentalists, however, point out that the world’s 131 million hectares of tree plantations tend to be less biodiverse than natural forests and burn more easily. Sini Eräjää, head of Greenpeace’s European food and forests campaign, said it would be “a terrible idea” to cut down natural forests and replace them with wood plantations. “It would be a disaster for nature and the climate,” he said. “Natural, biodiverse forests are more resistant to drought, fire and disease, so they are a much safer carbon store than the tree plantations we’ve seen smoking this summer from Portugal to California. Wood can play a bigger role in construction, but doubling the world’s tree plantations at the expense of priceless nature is simply disappointing, when modest reductions in meat and dairy farming would free up much-needed land.” Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you to the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online advertising and content sponsored by external parties. For more information, see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Mishra accepted that wildlife loss will occur with tree plantations and called for “strong governance and careful planning to limit negative impacts on biodiversity”. “Biophysical risks”, such as the possibility of urban fires becoming more frequent, had not been assessed in the report, he added. Wood is still favored by U.S. homebuilders, but as wildfires have intensified amid worsening climate disruption, some are questioning the practice of building with flammable materials. Abhilash Panda, the deputy head of partnerships at the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction in Geneva, said: “Wood does offer benefits. It provides a carbon sink, reduces emissions and provides a way to deal with unmanaged forests. On the downside, it’s flammable. However, what matters most in determining fire risk is what type of dwelling is being considered, what the target is and what the location is. Risk is site specific and any design must build resilience into that.” About 15 billion trees are cut down worldwide every year right now. The planet’s tree population is thought to have nearly halved since the dawn of human civilization.
title: “Timber Cities Could Cut 100 Billion Tonnes Of Co2 Emissions By 2100 Environment Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-24” author: “Cherryl Losh”
The overhaul of construction practices required for such a shift would require up to 149 million hectares of new timber plantations – and increased harvests from unprotected natural forests – but need not encroach on agricultural land, according to the Potsdam Institute for Climate Change paper Implications. Research (PIK). Housing 90% of the world’s growing urban population in tall wooden buildings could prevent 106 billion tonnes of carbon emissions by 2100, research says. Abhijeet Mishra, lead author of the paper, said: “More than half the world’s population lives in cities today, and by 2100 that number will increase significantly. This means more homes will be built with steel and concrete, most of which have a serious carbon footprint. But we have an alternative. We can house the new urban population in high-rise buildings – that is, four to 12 stories – made of wood.” The study, published in Nature Communications on Tuesday, is the first to analyze the scale of potential emissions cuts from a large-scale transition to “timber cities”. Using four different land-use scenarios, PIK scientists used the Magpie open-source global land-use model to explore the implications and practicalities of the ‘timber cities’ concept. Their reasoning was that wood has the lowest carbon footprint of any building material because the carbon dioxide absorbed during tree growth will not be emitted until the wood is eventually destroyed. Alexander Popp, co-author of the study, said preventing logging for timber in virgin forests and biodiversity conservation areas was crucial to their calculations. “The explicit protection of these protected areas is crucial, however, establishing timber plantations at the expense of other unprotected natural areas could further increase future biodiversity loss,” he said. Environmentalists, however, point out that the world’s 131 million hectares of tree plantations tend to be less biodiverse than natural forests and burn more easily. Sini Eräjää, head of Greenpeace’s European food and forests campaign, said it would be “a terrible idea” to cut down natural forests and replace them with wood plantations. “It would be a disaster for nature and the climate,” he said. “Natural, biodiverse forests are more resistant to drought, fire and disease, so they are a much safer carbon store than the tree plantations we’ve seen smoking this summer from Portugal to California. Wood can play a bigger role in construction, but doubling the world’s tree plantations at the expense of priceless nature is simply disappointing, when modest reductions in meat and dairy farming would free up much-needed land.” Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you to the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online advertising and content sponsored by external parties. For more information, see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Mishra accepted that wildlife loss will occur with tree plantations and called for “strong governance and careful planning to limit negative impacts on biodiversity”. “Biophysical risks”, such as the possibility of urban fires becoming more frequent, had not been assessed in the report, he added. Wood is still favored by U.S. homebuilders, but as wildfires have intensified amid worsening climate disruption, some are questioning the practice of building with flammable materials. Abhilash Panda, the deputy head of partnerships at the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction in Geneva, said: “Wood does offer benefits. It provides a carbon sink, reduces emissions and provides a way to deal with unmanaged forests. On the downside, it’s flammable. However, what matters most in determining fire risk is what type of dwelling is being considered, what the target is and what the location is. Risk is site specific and any design must build resilience into that.” About 15 billion trees are cut down worldwide every year right now. The planet’s tree population is thought to have nearly halved since the dawn of human civilization.
