There are two main problems I see preventing the end of systematic deforestation. First, we do use the wood for stuff. What do we replace all of those wood products with? Second, developed...
There are two main problems I see preventing the end of systematic deforestation.
First, we do use the wood for stuff. What do we replace all of those wood products with?
Second, developed countries have built their giant economies on the backs of doing things like cutting down all of their forests. Do we need to pay developing countries like Brazil and Indonesia to keep their forests standing?
Edit: I do realize that beef and palm oil are major contributors to deforestation, but assuming we can get that under control.. what about the first two points?
Currently, the the biggest drivers of deforestation are agricultural expansion and livestock ranching, not logging1,2. As for what we could use instead of wood, such as hemp, bamboo, and cork3. I...
Currently, the the biggest drivers of deforestation are agricultural expansion and livestock ranching, not logging1,2. As for what we could use instead of wood, such as hemp, bamboo, and cork3. I tried looking for examples of artificial or laboratory grown wood, but couldn't find much. Also, I got most of these sources straight from DuckDuckGo, not any scholarly articles. You'll probably have to look harder than I did to get any specific data.
I sadly don't have a good answer to your second point. In fact, it's a recurring problem that I've noticed. How do we force or coerce other countries to stop polluting, deforestation, and whatnot. Paying them off is certainly an option, but not one many governments would want to do. Embargoes are also technically an option, as well as invasion, but those aren't exactly good for the global political climate. Someone more knowledgeable than I am in global politics might know more.
Edit: added a comma between links for source 1 and 2 in order to make them more distincive.
To expand on your first point, timber from logging is primarily used in home construction. Modern building techniques have already replaced wood framing with steel, but wood tends to be cheaper...
To expand on your first point, timber from logging is primarily used in home construction. Modern building techniques have already replaced wood framing with steel, but wood tends to be cheaper and sturdier so it is still the preferred material in framing (at least in NA). Another big thing that is high cost, but better for the environment is Brick, we need to be utilizing brick more in modern construction (especially in wood addicted America). Brick is not only more environmentally friendly, but has much better longevity.
As for @Adams second point, I think if the UN is going to attempt to enforce sanctions on developing countries to stop deforestation it is only reasonable that the developed nations that lead the world help reimburse them for the lost revenue, at least partially.
Hey, in related news:
Teresa Kok(Malaysian MP): Govt to stop oil palm expansion, maintain forest cover
There are two main problems I see preventing the end of systematic deforestation.
First, we do use the wood for stuff. What do we replace all of those wood products with?
Second, developed countries have built their giant economies on the backs of doing things like cutting down all of their forests. Do we need to pay developing countries like Brazil and Indonesia to keep their forests standing?
Edit: I do realize that beef and palm oil are major contributors to deforestation, but assuming we can get that under control.. what about the first two points?
Currently, the the biggest drivers of deforestation are agricultural expansion and livestock ranching, not logging1,2. As for what we could use instead of wood, such as hemp, bamboo, and cork3. I tried looking for examples of artificial or laboratory grown wood, but couldn't find much. Also, I got most of these sources straight from DuckDuckGo, not any scholarly articles. You'll probably have to look harder than I did to get any specific data.
I sadly don't have a good answer to your second point. In fact, it's a recurring problem that I've noticed. How do we force or coerce other countries to stop polluting, deforestation, and whatnot. Paying them off is certainly an option, but not one many governments would want to do. Embargoes are also technically an option, as well as invasion, but those aren't exactly good for the global political climate. Someone more knowledgeable than I am in global politics might know more.
Edit: added a comma between links for source 1 and 2 in order to make them more distincive.
To expand on your first point, timber from logging is primarily used in home construction. Modern building techniques have already replaced wood framing with steel, but wood tends to be cheaper and sturdier so it is still the preferred material in framing (at least in NA). Another big thing that is high cost, but better for the environment is Brick, we need to be utilizing brick more in modern construction (especially in wood addicted America). Brick is not only more environmentally friendly, but has much better longevity.
As for @Adams second point, I think if the UN is going to attempt to enforce sanctions on developing countries to stop deforestation it is only reasonable that the developed nations that lead the world help reimburse them for the lost revenue, at least partially.