Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LdSentinal
good Lord, what is so damn special about old growth vs new growth?

I mean these aren’t some remnant of Jurassic times that have some intrinsic value. They are trees.

They need to get French with these wackos.

5 posted on 10/13/2007 9:41:56 AM PDT by bill1952 (The 10 most important words for change: "If it is to be, it is up to me")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: bill1952; fanfan

You got that right. The Canadian Forces have some new submarines picked up from Uncle Tony (Blair)’s Used Sub Shoppe for a cool 750 million or so, sinking these Greenpeace pukes would be a fine use for these new additions to the Canadian Navy.

And Stephen Harper is just the PM with the balls to do it.


7 posted on 10/13/2007 9:48:06 AM PDT by mkjessup (Jan 20, 2009 - "We Don't Know. Where Rudy Went. Just Glad He's Not. The President. Burma Shave.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: bill1952

Wood-wise, old growth is denser and stronger. The rings are closer together and it tends to be more visually pleasing, IMHO.

New growth is usually a specially bred tree that grows quickly, but is not as “good” of a wood. You can really tell the difference when you look at the rings.

On that note... Old growth lumber is very desirable and commands a higher price. I’d think that paper and pulp would only be made with scraps that would otherwise be trashed or burned.

Here in Oregon the paper mills have started farming trees just for pulp. It’s quite a sight.


22 posted on 10/13/2007 1:42:38 PM PDT by El Sordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson