A lot of these “planting trees” initiatives are bogus. Planting 100000 of the same tree in an area doesnt guarantee they grow, nor does it help the environment at all when they succumb to a disease/pest in a few years
yea i always questioned is a native tree, no in most cases, the tree dies due to not adapted to the environment it is in. they likely choose a fast growing tree.
I’m not saying this to defend Google in any way, because what they’ve done is reprehensible. However, trees build most of their mass when they’re young. Therefore, they consume more CO2 early in their lives. It’s how they get the carbon to build with.
If they did this illegally, what will be the consequences?
Let them plant trees at a CO2 consuming equivalence level, I.e. if they plant younger trees, they have to plant more.
A lot of these “planting trees” initiatives are bogus. Planting 100000 of the same tree in an area doesnt guarantee they grow, nor does it help the environment at all when they succumb to a disease/pest in a few years
yea i always questioned is a native tree, no in most cases, the tree dies due to not adapted to the environment it is in. they likely choose a fast growing tree.
I was more referring to acres and acres of monocultures, but yes, thats also an issue.
I’m not saying this to defend Google in any way, because what they’ve done is reprehensible. However, trees build most of their mass when they’re young. Therefore, they consume more CO2 early in their lives. It’s how they get the carbon to build with.
The damage here is habitat destruction.
That combined with a massive fine adjusted to their annual revenue, and a country wide ban on them deploying any data centers would be a start.