Where do trees come from?

[jshell]

OK, a simple question about trees. Where does the mass come from?

Take for example a super-fast growing conifer like leylandia, where does the mass of the tree come from in that if one weighs in at around 3-tonnes and an assumed water content of even 50% - 1.5 tonnes of 'wood', I don't see where the rest of the mass can come from. I can't simply believe that 1.5 tonnes can just come from ground based nutrients without the ground subsiding around the tree and it certainly doesn't eat squirrels/pigeons/insects etc. So, what's the answer??? Anyone know?

[him_over_there]

I would guess the carbon dioxide that they take in from the air ?

[thehawk]

God makes them.

[alanruss]

Photosynthesis. Takes Carbon from the CO2 in the air. Combines it with water and does the Calvin cycle to make sugars and what not. The soil provides a growing medium and base nutrients. Not the mass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis

HTH

Edited by alanruss on Monday 23 March 12:24

[jshell]

alanruss said:

Photosynthesis. Takes Carbon from the CO2 in the air. Combines it with water and does the Calvin cycle to make sugars and what not. The soil provides a growing medium and base nutrients. Not the mass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis

HTH

Edited by alanruss on Monday 23 March 12:24

Great link!

This quote:

The amount of energy trapped by photosynthesis is immense, approximately 100 terawatts per year:[3] which is about seven times larger than the yearly power consumption of human civilization.[4] In all, photosynthetic organisms convert around 100,000,000,000 tonnes of carbon into biomass per year

...is amazing and answers the Q nicely!!!

[dirty doug]

Well a daddy tree & a mummy tree who love each other very much......

[dmitsi]

Acorns?

[davido140]

jshell said:

alanruss said:

Photosynthesis. Takes Carbon from the CO2 in the air. Combines it with water and does the Calvin cycle to make sugars and what not. The soil provides a growing medium and base nutrients. Not the mass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis

HTH

Edited by alanruss on Monday 23 March 12:24

Great link!

This quote:

The amount of energy trapped by photosynthesis is immense, approximately 100 terawatts per year:[3] which is about seven times larger than the yearly power consumption of human civilization.[4] In all, photosynthetic organisms convert around 100,000,000,000 tonnes of carbon into biomass per year

...is amazing and answers the Q nicely!!!

And this is precisely why we shouldnt be cocking about with hybrids and electric cars but instead STOP CHOPPING DOWN THE fkING RAIN FORESTS!!

Oddly the eco meanies seem to have forgotten all about this cause, even though deforestation is as bad as ever, instead they would rather vilify people for having nice things they cant afford.

twunts.

[kambites]

davido140 said:

And this is precisely why we shouldnt be cocking about with hybrids and electric cars but instead STOP CHOPPING DOWN THE fkING RAIN FORESTS!!

Actually cutting down old forests is a good thing if you allow new ones to grow in their place (which, admittedly, they don't). Old trees absorb almost no CO2.

[davido140]

kambites said:

davido140 said:

And this is precisely why we shouldnt be cocking about with hybrids and electric cars but instead STOP CHOPPING DOWN THE fkING RAIN FORESTS!!

Actually cutting down old forests is a good thing if you allow new ones to grow in their place (which, admittedly, they don't). Old trees absorb almost no CO2.

true dat, homie! Not sure if its possible to "manually" re-plant rainforest though, I suppose it they just left it alone it would recover on its own and spread.

But as you say, old/some is better than none as its typically chopped, some sold, some burned and used for farm/grazing land, and it promptly turns to desert a few years later.

I think we should do some massive commercial reforrestation in the UK, grown em, chop em, build stuff out of them then start over again. Very good for the environment all around!

[BoRED S2upid]

alanruss said:

Photosynthesis. Takes Carbon from the CO2 in the air. Combines it with water and does the Calvin cycle to make sugars and what not. The soil provides a growing medium and base nutrients. Not the mass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis

HTH

Edited by alanruss on Monday 23 March 12:24

They teach this stuff in GCSE Biology.

[kambites]

I think the problem with rain forests is that there is only a very thin layer of fertile soil in which the trees grow. As the name suggests, it rains lots of the rain forests - the only thing that keeps the soil from being washed away is the trees.

They cut them down to make space for farming, then by two years later the soil is all washed away so the land is useless (both for farming, and for trees) so they go and cut down some more.

[Tony*T3]

Tree = ultimate carbon based life form....???

[MitchT]

Perhaps gravity is much stronger underneath trees, thus making them appear heavier than other objects of comparable mass.

[dirty boy]

davido140 said:

grow em, chop em, build stuff out of them then start over again. Very good for the environment all around!

Certainly looks that way.

It's when we burn the wood it becomes a problem.

[Simpo Two]

BoRED S2upid said:

alanruss said:

Photosynthesis. Takes Carbon from the CO2 in the air. Combines it with water and does the Calvin cycle to make sugars and what not. The soil provides a growing medium and base nutrients. Not the mass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis

HTH

Edited by alanruss on Monday 23 March 12:24

They teach this stuff in GCSE Biology.

In its most basic form it's Water + CO2 = Sugar + O2

Only later do you realise it's rather more complicated than that - in fact it's all rather brilliant. Plant physiology was my favourite subject

[davido140]

dirty boy said:

davido140 said:

grow em, chop em, build stuff out of them then start over again. Very good for the environment all around!

Certainly looks that way.

It's when we burn the wood it becomes a problem.

Burning isnt a problem either so long as a new tree is grown in its place. thats "neutral", building stuff out of trees locks away the carbon for decades, if not longer.

[BoRED S2upid]

Simpo Two said:

BoRED S2upid said:

alanruss said:

Photosynthesis. Takes Carbon from the CO2 in the air. Combines it with water and does the Calvin cycle to make sugars and what not. The soil provides a growing medium and base nutrients. Not the mass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis

HTH

Edited by alanruss on Monday 23 March 12:24

They teach this stuff in GCSE Biology.

In its most basic form it's Water + CO2 = Sugar + O2

Only later do you realise it's rather more complicated than that - in fact it's all rather brilliant. Plant physiology was my favourite subject

I thought for a moment you put Plant Psychology.

[Tony*T3]

davido140 said:

dirty boy said:

davido140 said:

grow em, chop em, build stuff out of them then start over again. Very good for the environment all around!

Certainly looks that way.

It's when we burn the wood it becomes a problem.

Burning isnt a problem either so long as a new tree is grown in its place. thats "neutral", building stuff out of trees locks away the carbon for decades, if not longer.

Not a great arguement that though is it....? Considering burning oil based products (such as petrol) releases carbon thats been locked away since the time of the dinosaurs.....

[davido140]

Tony*T3 said:

davido140 said:

dirty boy said:

davido140 said:

grow em, chop em, build stuff out of them then start over again. Very good for the environment all around!

Certainly looks that way.

It's when we burn the wood it becomes a problem.

Burning isnt a problem either so long as a new tree is grown in its place. thats "neutral", building stuff out of trees locks away the carbon for decades, if not longer.

Not a great arguement that though is it....? Considering burning oil based products (such as petrol) releases carbon thats been locked away since the time of the dinosaurs.....

the point being (according to the greenies) is that we cant replace the fossil fuels. To be honest I'm not convinced by the whole "co2 problem" whether man-made or natural, but lets assume for a moment that co2 emmisions are the issue, then burning freshly grown wood for heating is fine so long as you plant a tree to replace the one you just cut down to burn. net amount of co2 "released" is zero.

frankly its all academic, because its all utter bullcrap anyway.

CO2 tripe has trampled all over the cause of the trust environmentalist, ask David Belamy [sp]