The ‘forest’ cut down there is just a wood farm. There’s no ecosystem lost, since these farm are basically sterile
Trees are trees, but trees aren’t forests. And a trees don’t have nearly the ecological impact of forests. In fact, in the U.S. and around the world we have the problem of way too many trees, which is causing apocalyptic ecological damage, because they’re the wrong kind.
Cutting down all those trees in a tree farm isn’t hurting the environment very much for the same reason that randomly planting a bunch of trees for a tree farm doesn’t help the environment, which is why conservation is so important.
There’s no ecosystem lost, since these farm are basically sterile
Wow. All star naturalist here.
Trees planted there to farm wood. It’s a wood farm, not a natural forest. Get over it already.
With that logic we could cut down pretty much every single forest in Sweden and tell people to stop crying about it.
Edit: Why the down votes? We pretty much have no natural forests left in Sweden. It’s basically all mono cultures planted with the intent to be cut down and sold. But if that’s the only forests you have they’re still very valuable (as forests I mean).
Why the downvotes
I for my part downvoted because it’s just false equivalence. Cutting down a part of a commercial forest is pretty far from completely cutting “every single forest” in Sweden.
Is it great that trees were cut down without replanting? No.
Is there a perfectly cleared and infrastructurally connected plot of land in Brandenburg that Tesla could have used instead? Also no.
Your comparison was basically the same as “We sell a plot of land to Elon? Why not just sell every plot of land to him then!”.
The point is not that sweden is selling every inch of land to elon.
The point is that every forest in sweden is “commercial forest” so that’s a meaningless justification.
Ah I see the problem then. I wasn’t trying to equate anything. I was simply addressing the reasoning behind the statement (that non-natural forests don’t matter), taking it to the extreme to make point. I don’t know anything about the forest in question, and I wasn’t talking about it.
Yeah, it was just naturally monoculture. And now it’s naturally concrete. Whats the big deal?!?! \s
Wanna bet that gigafactory somehow gets closed down or cancelled before opening? Tesla might not even survive that long.
Is it cheaper to cut down a forest than to buy a agriculture field?
Is it cheaper to cut down a forest than to buy a agriculture field?
That area was planted to be cut down. It was a monoculture for wood harvesting and the surrounding area still is, AFAIK. The only change to the original plan has been to not plant young trees again after cutting everything down and instead build a factory.
