Even given government incentives and a price on carbon, however, ArborGen must satisfy concerns from regulators and environmental groups that its engineered trees will not, especially when gifted with the ability to resist cold, spread untrammeled through forests.
Pollen problems
At its most basic, life is about reproduction. And the species' struggle to adapt and survive can make attempts to control the fertility of plants difficult, according to Steve Strauss, a tree geneticist at Oregon State University who has also consulted with ArborGen.
ArborGen relies on what has been the most popular system for restricting plant pollen, which uses a bacterial gene to produce a toxic enzyme called barnase that slices apart genetic material in a cell, causing death. Through genetic trickery, the enzyme is only produced in the pollen-spreading parts of the tree, destroying its ability to reproduce -- at least most of the time.
Given the number of trees that will be produced, there will likely be enough genetic instability to allow a very small number of the freeze-tolerant eucalyptuses to reproduce, Strauss said. Rather than an absolute containment system, barnase should be thought of as a mitigation strategy, he added.
"It doesn't mean there are no pollen grains produced," Strauss said. "Almost nothing in biology is 100 percent."
A tiny number of seedlings are almost assured to escape from the eucalyptus plantations, Strauss said. But since the trees, in his evaluation, are unlikely to prove invasive, there should be little cause for alarm.
"When you talk about trees, storms happen, wind blows," he said. "The containment is not absolute. There is the chance of some spread. Is it likely to become an invasive weed? Seems unlikely to me."
Until now, only two of ArborGen's experimental eucalyptus stations have been allowed to flower, and the company has reported little in the way of pollen production in the trees. It is now seeking to greatly expand the number and location of trees allowed to flower to 28 sites totaling 330 acres scattered across seven states. The Agriculture Department issued a draft approval of the expansion, subject to public comment, earlier this month.
The modified eucalyptus trees are already planted at most of these sites, and as they approach sexual maturity, ArborGen has been forced to pluck the trees' flowers or cut them down completely, causing millions of dollars in lost research, said Nancy Hood, ArborGen's public affairs director.
This test acreage is fairly small, hardly the equivalent of a full-scale commercial planting, as some environmental groups have accused. (For comparison, there are more than 32 million acres of pine plantation in the South.) However, ArborGen has confessed that it hopes USDA will deregulate the trees by the time the cohort reaches harvest age -- around seven years or so -- allowing the resulting pulp to be sold.
Many biotech researchers are supportive of the expanded experimental permit, which will allow more complete studies of the fertility containment system. While ArborGen has released little in the way of peer-reviewed research so far, it will publish barnase results this year, said Maud Hinchee, ArborGen's chief technology officer.
Such data would be a welcome change. While barnase's mechanism is well documented -- and approved for use in domesticated crops like rapeseed -- its effectiveness has barely been studied, according to an analysis written by Strauss in 2007.
See what we're tweeting about
62 Comments
Add CommentThis is a disaster waiting to happen. How did this get planned and approved? The law of unintended consequences is waiting in the wings.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have read that there is an invasive weed taking over the bottom of the Mediterranean. It all originates from one male plant, propellers from boats break it up, and it reproduces vegetatively. Blocking seeding might not be enough.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOh, get a grip. It's a tree, not a weed.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe US desperately needs a sustainable domestic wood supply.
This article is about feedstock for the pulp & paper industry, but sheet goods and dimensional lumber can be made from eucalyptus.
Aside from the biotech nature of the trees, which I think has not been studied enough to prove its safety, there is the question of the impacts of large plantations of Eucalyptus on wildlife habitat, regional aquifers, and aesthetics. In addition, they will come to harvest more often, causing increased potential for polluting surface waters with sediment laden runoff, increased soil compaction from logging equipment, and increased habitat fragmentation for forest dwelling species. All these issues effect people either directly or indirectly, and not just the footprint of the plantation. ArborGen and Monsanto may make even huger profits from this, but will they pay to clean up the water?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is worth pointing out the all plant material really does is convert available soil resources into plant tissue. Not very complicated: different plants have different form, but they all do pretty much the same thing, with the assistance of sunlight.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe faster you grow stuff, the faster you deplete the soil, requiring replenishment (fertilizers).
This ain't rocket science.
I don't imagine they will be doing anything to modify the harsh chemicals used in paper production.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe need to be careful with this...after a few years we will see that we cannot harvest the trees because they have become a new haven for koalas. These cute furry creatures will become the poster mammals for PETA and other similar organizations and the company that created the forest will be unable to harvest it due to removing koala habitat. Unless the company has a hidden agenda to sell koala skin boots and gloves this is likely to be a short lived project.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMonoclonal culture in the field is always a disaster. This is a very bad idea. When a new strain of pathogen arises which can easily kill one tree, all trees are affected. There is no mention here of the equally disastrous effects this will have on the ecosystem. Everything from soil symbiotes to wildlife will be damaged by introducing a dominant foreign organism in vast numbers.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSemiahmoo is spot on. You'll hear many companies crow about how many billion acres they've 're-forested'. It's particularly galling now in Florida where the odious phosphate industry (read 'strip mining') is talking about 'Making Florida Grow'.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA monoculture is not even close to a forest. Availability to animals is nearly zero. It is laughable, really, to call these projects good for the environment. And, just like the folks trying to grow corn for fuel, they will quickly learn that additional chemicals must be applied to the soils.
I did read recently that GM seeds are 'all over Europe'. That might be true. But a monoculture of GM trees is the same as a monoculture of pines. At least a few native animals can use the pines.
Arg.
http://www.msadesign.com/msadesign/Blog/Blog.html
No, that is not true. The vast majority of genetically modified organisms are not allowed in the European Union. There are some exceptions, mostly for maize for feedstock, however the EU has very strict policies regarding GM organisms. In fact, there is talk about obliging all food manufacturers that sell their products in Europe to clearly and visibly label their products if they contain GM organisms in the ingredients.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWell, you can only grow a tree so fast, the US forest genetics laboratory in Rhinelander, WI has it down to 20 years. Is this an improvement or just another $$ gift to genetic manipulation? As most of the comments indicate, the public knows a scan when it sees one but we are helpless, held in the thrawl of the media, limited to comments that lead nowhere.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe plant in the Med is a cultivar from the aquaria industry; it is calurpa calurpa. Maybe this is an improvement over the dreaded kudzu, which is also a perennial, and if you just want lignin for use, well, there it is. Undefeated after 50 years. Instead of poisoning the land which so far hasn't detered kudzu, maybe we should use it for sustainable pulp.
But since the idea is to throw $$ at big corporates, nothing else will do.
Well, you can only grow a tree so fast, the US forest genetics laboratory in Rhinelander, WI has it down to 20 years. Is this an improvement or just another $$ gift to genetic manipulation? As most of the comments indicate, the public knows a scan when it sees one but we are helpless, held in the thrawl of the media, limited to comments that lead nowhere.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe plant in the Med is a cultivar from the aquaria industry; it is calurpa calurpa. Maybe this is an improvement over the dreaded kudzu, which is also a perennial, and if you just want lignin for use, well, there it is. Undefeated after 50 years. Instead of poisoning the land which so far hasn't detered kudzu, maybe we should use it for sustainable pulp.
But since the idea is to throw $$ at big corporates, nothing else will do.
Well, you can only grow a tree so fast, the US forest genetics laboratory in Rhinelander, WI has it down to 20 years. Is this an improvement or just another $$ gift to genetic manipulation? As most of the comments indicate, the public knows a scan when it sees one but we are helpless, held in the thrawl of the media, limited to comments that lead nowhere.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe plant in the Med is a cultivar from the aquaria industry; it is calurpa calurpa. Maybe this is an improvement over the dreaded kudzu, which is also a perennial, and if you just want lignin for use, well, there it is. Undefeated after 50 years. Instead of poisoning the land which so far hasn't detered kudzu, maybe we should use it for sustainable pulp.
But since the idea is to throw $$ at big corporates, nothing else will do.
Well, you can only grow a tree so fast, the US forest genetics laboratory in Rhinelander, WI has it down to 20 years. Is this an improvement or just another $$ gift to genetic manipulation? As most of the comments indicate, the public knows a scan when it sees one but we are helpless, held in the thrawl of the media, limited to comments that lead nowhere.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe plant in the Med is a cultivar from the aquaria industry; it is calurpa calurpa. Maybe this is an improvement over the dreaded kudzu, which is also a perennial, and if you just want lignin for use, well, there it is. Undefeated after 50 years. Instead of poisoning the land which so far hasn't detered kudzu, maybe we should use it for sustainable pulp.
But since the idea is to throw $$ at big corporates, nothing else will do.
Hemp yields 4 times more paper pulps per acres then trees and can be harvested 4 times a year unlike paper trees that take 20 yrs to mature. Legalize hemp, don't create more genitally modified pants.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDimitris: I shouldn't have posted that without citation and apologize. In fact I DO know about the policies in Europe. Thanks for straightening me out.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHowever, I did see that authoritatively and if I can find it I'll post it. I have no clue how that would ever happen, though, given the EU stance on GMO.
So, forget everything I said after "I did read recently…" :-)
http://www.msadesign.com/msadesign/Blog/Blog.html
No we do not need a domestic wood supply. The pulp industry may want it but we do not need it. Certainly NOT from genetically engineered trees, with practically zero testing for its unintended and unknown effects. We should stop experimenting with the world's ecology just to provide 10% more profit to certain infinitely greedy companies. This is totally crazy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOur society has gone crazy and totally irresponsible by allowing genetic modification of food and now trees, essentially with zero long term testing. We let our system be driven solely by profit hunger of a couple of large companies and lost sight of our safety. There is no body or governmental organization in our system today that looks out for the safety of our food and water supply or the safety of a crazy an unnecessary expriment like planting genetically engineered trees in the south. All if the government agencies that we the people pay to look out for our interests are taken over and directed by large corporate interests. This will inevitably lead to a similar disaster that we had last year in the similarly unregulated fiance industry. When will the people of our country wake up and take back our government, our legislature and our supreme court from the corporate interests that are controlling and dominating them today?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGood idea, but probably makes less money for International Paper.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhoa, seriously? Have these people been living in a box, or do they simply not care whether or not they destroy an entire ecosystem? You can't do something like this without some pretty serious environmental consequences. I hope they take this into consideration: http://www.ethiopianreview.com/news/6660
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNo, this tree isn't a typical weed, but that doesn't mean it couldn't become invasive. if if can survive and even one tree can reproduce, it has that potential to slowly out-compete the native trees, especially to the north and west in regions where is may be drier and more like the African regions where it has gone invasive. Despite that risk, I think this is an awesome product. I can't wait to see it grown here in the US and put GMOs in their place, leading the country in productivity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVery good job, that's all we needed genetical engineering(I call it "mad science") Soon enough humans will be genetically engineered as well.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSeems it's always in the south where they want to introduce some scientific project for the good of????? a wallet that lives somewhere else? What are the down falls of this? I hope that someone in charge of allowing this to happen asks the right questions, and gets all the facts on both the positive and negative, And get it checked and rechecked, It seems whenever a new species is introduced to a area that is not a natural habitat of the new species, it's always some unforeseen disaster. The natural things that combat the natural problems of these species do not exist in the new habitats. Just look at all the other great ideas that have gone wrong with these projects. I am not saying it wont work, Just be sure to do ALL the research, Pro and Con. So you will need people from both sides to get all the facts. When ever someone is selling a product, it's always the best new idea on the planet. And then??????? POW......How did that happen, and what are we going to do about it??????
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAround year 2000 genetic engineers in Australia attempted to create a mouse contraceptive, entirely by accident they created an incredibly lethal version of mousepox, see http://healthjournalclub.blogspot.com/2009/11/armageddon-bug.html
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe idea of mixing and matching genetic traits across genus, phyla and kingdom and then releasing these self propagating organisms into the wild, while thinking we have any idea what the consequences might be, is beyond reckless, it is hubristic insanity.
http://healthjournalclub.blogspot.com/
I am interested in the claim that Australian eucalyptus "in its conventional strains now dominates the tropical timber industry." I have never thought of timber derived from Australian eucalyptus as a tropical timber, let alone a timber that now dominates this segment of the market. Could the author or anyone else please point me in the direction of information that can update me on this?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDoesn't anyone of these science and industry types ever look to see if theses things have been brought into the US before and what the results are?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEucalyptus as lumber? Check out these eucalyptus tree/ weeds in California. The eucalyptus ranges the Cal coast at least as far north as San Francisco Bay because years ago some clever fools thought that by importing it from overseas into this arid climate, it would establish itself quickly and be good for fence posts and telephone poles. Well this stuff succeeded in establishing itself alright - now it is everywhere. A timber boon for California? Nooooo. Why not? The so-called timber eucalyptus trees produce is useless - no strength at all. Think about it - why would industry want to plant millions of acres just to burn in a wood fired power plant if it could be sold as lumber? Now the stuff is a weed tree all over the coast. And the article was right about one thing - it will be the new coal industry of the south. Remember how the article states that the tree is carbon hungry and has a high growth rate? Well all of the carbon "sequestered" in the tree will be released into the atmosphere all at once when it is burned - just like coal.
Don't you just love 'progress'?
Quite ! - and with an insatiable global market, the landscape is going to change - but only from Pine to Eucalyptus. So what lives in Eucalyptus forests ? People on retreat with headcolds ?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOMG ! - Not Koalas !. Thanks for the warning. This could get right out of control and soon the Kola - instead of being "endangered" - would be terrorizing whole neighbourhoods with chainsaws stolen from sad little logging companies. What a good thing you pointed that out. Eternal gratitude from the human race will be yours I am sure !
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTotally !
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat you say makes totally sense - sadly. In the end everything foots the bill for domineering pig-ignorance, but the ones picking-up from it can just move - and wreck somewhere else, while posing as "farmers".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWindfarms are another great example of this. They even get a pat on the back from many environMentalist who "don't know much about Algebra" - or wind - or energy.
On the contrary, I would suggest that "Plant tissue production" was vastly less understandable than a rocket, otherwise any firework factory would be more complicated than a bio-engineering lab. - which it isn't. Any prick can make a rocket with some hope of a flight.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlso it is cereal production which requires nitrate fertilizers
Most of a tree is hydrocarbon from water from the roots, and CO2 in the air. There are but tiny traces of minerals taken-up, and most of this probably falls back with the leaves. I confess to being not entirely in the shallows here, but "fertilizer run-off" - surely - give us a break to look at the real issues which are serious !
Pine plantations have many functions, one of which is wood supply. Others include wildlife habitat, recreation, and water quality management. Eucalyptus will not fulfill these other functions. Additionally, eucalyptus will poison the soil (it uses strong chemicals to quell competition), increase forest fire incidence (it is a VERY flammable tree), deplete the soil and lower the water table (fast growth comes at a price). This idea amounts to rape of the land, pure and simple; bad idea.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWHile it's not a cereal. There is still a considerable amount of mineral nutrients locked up in wood. When that wood is grown more quickly and the timber removed that is a net loss from the ecosystem. Faster growth rates + shorter rotation = greater loss of mineral nutrients. These soil cannot sustain more than a few rotations of this intensive growth, and the only way to sustain this would be fertilization. This is already occurring with native species in some parts of the world.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's simple when has it ever been beneficial to play with nature everytime they release a new species into an ecosystem disaster follows. If the paper industry needs a new resource why not get hemp legalized hemp is one of the greatest agriculture products to ever come from the earth. Before it was deemed a drug which hemp is not it would take a joint the size a telephone pole before you would feel any effects it was on pace to become the primary source for paper. Due to corprate intrests of hearst dupont and dow chemicals it was killing there bottom line. So it was quickly demonized and faded away into history. Hemp is the answer to many of our problems today hopefully they will repeal the legislation against it before introducing a foreign species into the enviroment.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's simple when has it ever been beneficial to play with nature everytime they release a new species into an ecosystem disaster follows. If the paper industry needs a new resource why not get hemp legalized hemp is one of the greatest agriculture products to ever come from the earth. Before it was deemed a drug which hemp is not it would take a joint the size a telephone pole before you would feel any effects it was on pace to become the primary source for paper. Due to corprate intrests of hearst dupont and dow chemicals it was killing there bottom line. So it was quickly demonized and faded away into history. Hemp is the answer to many of our problems today hopefully they will repeal the legislation against it before introducing a foreign species into the enviroment.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSounds good to me.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAny guesses as to what the "bio-energy industry" runs on. ?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo the question is, "how many kW-hrs (heat) from oil, does it take to harvest 100kW-hrs (heat) from the biosphere ?" ?
Any answers ?
if we have forest of eucalytis trees ,is it possible to get a license for Panda production as a source of fur and food? Maybe hunt camps for harvesting licenses?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTo the best of my knowledge Panda bears do not relate to Eucalyptus in any way whatsoever, so having a forest of the stuff won't bring your sordid little dream any closer to a reality.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMore bee deaths, more bat deaths, more invasive species and diseases. More spread to nearby native species, which is impossible to stop. How can our government allow this to happen to our land?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's just the same invincible Law - "If it pays, it can happen".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is shortsightedness on this apparent Law that has lead to the worlds current predicament. Will the gov. wake-up to this ? can THEY afford-to ? - Do they care if their grandchildren have to try to put it all back in working-order again ? Will this be possible ?
There is hope of this with the "Permaculture society" .org.
Scientifically-designed eucalyptus gives rise to the notion that the southeastern USA could soon host Koala Bears! Perhaps they could be genetically engineered to be edible, thus solving a food crisis. No more McDonalds' kangaroo blivets!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPlanned invasive plant that is what those paper companies are set to do. Cut down native pines and replace them with eucalyptus. This borders with insanity. First, what about the rest of the native plants growing in unison with the pines? The animals, The mushrooms? Eucalyptus are notorious for preventing any vegetation under their canopy. Profit before environment care that is what this proposal amounts to. It is horrible!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think that ALL GM content in products should be visible on labels so that we have a choice regarding consuming them or not. As I am anti GM I would NEVER consume any GM organism. How would these monocultures affect insects such as bees, etc which are essential for pollination, etc.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think that EVERYONE should have the right to know if they are consuming GM Products or not and that Euroe is right to enforce a GM label. After all we do not know what effect consuming GM Products will have on our health and our environment. What effect will these trees have on insects such as bees, which are becoming extinct and are essential for our survival, and what effect will these trees have on our environment. We are risking a lot just for money, as usual!!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat will paper companies think of next? Anyone who knows any.thing about organisms in those native pine trees knows that many of them are habitat specific. These eucalyptus trees are not their habtiat. They will die because they cannot adapt to drastic change. You can foresee a domino effect going though ecosystems on a very large scale
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere are hundreds of species of eucalyptus( as the Brazilians understand)most of the comments here seem to imply there's only one.I'd say the danger of a invasion of rampant koalas is somewhat overstated as only a few species are suitable as food.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe native population of the endangered Georgian Koala will be happy. Their range has been severely reduced since the disastrous introduction of the invasive Southern Pine two centuries ago.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNow, with their range restored, and their populations once again approaching nuisance status, Ugh Boots can finally open their long-awaited North American manufacturing facility (Ugh's are lined with Koala fur). Jobs! Jobs for all the laid-off paper mill workers.
Plant a tree, skin a Koala. Profits all around.
About the paper--how do they plan to get that Mentholiptis smell out of it?
I'm jus' sayin'
How many people here want to go back to the way things were before people started genetically modifying plants (think: corn, originally a tiny grass; apples, originally a small, bitter fruit; strawberries, originally miniscule little berries), animals (think: chihuahuas, originally wolves; chicken, originally forest fowl), and ourselves (think: early hominids before we became attracted to signs of intelligence like humor and ingenuity and started genetically modifying ourselves through sexual selection)? And yet, every time man does what he's been doing for tens of thousands of years and modifies something, everyone freaks out. Ah, humanity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow retarded do we need to not be able to see that breeding and "genetic modification" are entirely different. Maybe you can breed a mouse that glows in the dark, and thereby make the scientists who said that they did it by "geetic engineering" look foolish ?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat else is on your cozy little adgenda ?
Nuclear radiation is good for you or they wouldn't give it you in hospital ?
Burning coal must be ok or God would not have put it here ?
There is no such thing as a "invasive species" ?
Chocolate doesn't make you fat ?
Where does this "blank mind" approach to the future end ?
In total expletive deleted chaos I would suggest. It seems the camp has plenty to answer-for as it is.
Very "scientific" of you. Well done !
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAre breeding and genetic modification really entirely different? I mean the end results?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHas anyone considered the effect on the water table. Eucalyptus in California are notorious for their water uptake.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAre you kidding me? Monsanto has people all over government in key positions. They will see to it that none of the sensible pre-cautions you suggest can derail their plans. Almost everything the public knows about genetic engineering is a carefully crafted public relations line from Monsanto. This company is ruthless. They want legal control of key living organisms, and are getting it. They are like wild dogs on American small farmers. If their GE crops contaminate your land, they litigate for ownership of your crop. Bloodsuckers and leaches. Your stomach is a Monsanto experiment in unintended protein expression.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAre breeding and genetic modification really entirely different? I mean the end results?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYes. Gene splicing sounds exacting, but nothing could be further from the truth. Genetic material is combined using a "shotgun" technique. Whatever "sticks" and looks viable is considered for commercial exploitation. But combining dna this way causes unintended protein expressions. Who knows what compounds a GE organism will produce? Some domesticated animals refuse GE fodder. It's possible that genes can jump from GE corn to the bacterium in your gut and continue producing toxins designed to protect corn from pests. How intimate is that? Historically, researchers uncovering negative side effects have been targeted and careers ended. This industry is an abomination unfolding under the radar.
Agree with msadesign. Florida ecosystems have been trashed enough. Need to know how many native species will be displaced. Also, as to biofuel production, someone better figure out where all the water is going to come from in Florida.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIndustrial Hemp would be a superior solution. Hemp paper is longer lasting than wood pulp, stronger, acid-free, and chlorine free. (Chlorine is estimated to cause up to 10% of all Cancers.) 2
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHemp paper can be recycled 7 times, wood pulp 4 times.
Trees cut down to make paper take decades to grow, while hemp can be cultivated in as little as 100 days and can yield 4 times more paper over a 20 year period.
Farming 6% of the continental U.S. acreage with biomass crops would provide all of America's energy needs. 1
Hemp is Earth's number-one biomass resource; it is capable of producing 10 tons per acre in four months.
Hemp can produce 10 times more methanol than corn.
It's time for HEMP! VoteHemp(dot)com for a wealth of information.
Fundamentally, modifying genes to affect intended characteristics may also affect unexpressed characteristics. These undetermined changes may not occur until some future condition or event evokes them. There is no possible way to assess the long term impact of the undetermined, unexpressed changes that are being made today.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSomeday we all here in America will wake up and find that it is not America anymore...We need to at least keep up.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLou Jewell ALC
No one has mentioned the fire danger in these trees. I understand that in California, they contribute greatly to the wild fire danger because of their great height and because of their high oil content.....the crown catches fire, burns hot, and is blown by the wind to start more fires.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat's great genetically modified trees, this is now the answer of my big question long time ago when this technology for food made successful. I asked before why not applying this technology to trees so that we can grow more and fast trees at a time that would help to lessen global warming.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOh if that doesn't figure, let's make a fake forest..because you know legalizing hemp it too complicated
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this