Yeah, TP is renewable by design, since it comes from trees. Being from a grass like bamboo doesn’t change that, and bamboo isn’t absorbent, so I’m very concerned about the process they’re using to produce something that’s supposed to be somewhat absorbent.
Bamboo is great for TP, and since the first NRDC report (mentioned in my other response which shows my comment has data behind it) shows the shift to using bamboo fibers in many major brands, too.
Personally, I find bamboo way better than recycled (and bamboo use vs tree use is perfectly sustainable, bamboo grows faster than it can be farmed). We find the brand we use comparable to Charmin “normal” paper (not the overly plush stuff). Happy to recommend a brand to try if asked, but don’t want to sound like a shill/advert. Plenty out there on a search 😉
Paper Production and U.S. Forests
Approximately 79 million tons of paper was produced in the U.S. in 2013. Recovered fiber
accounts for 37% of the wood fiber used. Some of this fiber is lost in processing, with the result
that about a third of the volume of paper and paperboard produced is made up of recovered
fiber. The remaining two-‐thirds comes from trees harvested as pulpwood, wood chips, and other residues obtained from sawmill trimmings. On a mass basis, over 65 million tons of roundwood (dry basis), or 36% of the annual U.S. timber harvest, is used each year in manufacturing paper and paperboard. When chips and other residues are considered, the percent of harvest going to paper and paperboard production rises to about 47%. Typically, more than 65% of the nation’s pulpwood harvest is derived from the Southeastern region. In recent years, this percentage has risen to over 81%. Virtually all of that harvest is obtained from privately owned forestland. Individuals and families, private investment groups, and the forest industry own 57% of forestland in the United States. These lands provide 89% of the annual wood harvest (Oswalt et al. 2014). Annual removals of wood in the U.S. are less than half the annual increment. In other words, each year forests in the U.S. grow more than twice as much wood as is harvested. The annual harvest amounts to about 1.3% of total growing stock volume. Despite, and largely because of, ongoing removals that are only a portion of the forest’s annual growth, forests in the United States are increasing in extent. Also, the volume of trees contained within U.S forests is rising steadily. Today the U.S. has more forested land than in the early 1900s. Moreover, net growth has exceeded removals for at least 6 (and likely 7-‐8) consecutive decades.7 The result is the volume of wood stored in the nation’s forests has increased substantially over that period.
Source
Noone is going to virgin forests to send logs straight to a paper mill unless they are too small for the saw mills (byproducts of clear cut logging). The logs are far more valuable as lumber. But the byproducts are chiped and sent to paper mills so nothing is wasted. Your source is completely missing that point and not directing the enegry to the real culprit. Logging in virgin forests is no doubt a problem, but noone is logging them exclusively for paper.
First, your just assuming that the only use for pulpwood is toilet paper. “Wasted” is figurative with the context above.
But more importantly, from your quote:
On a mass basis, over 65 million tons of roundwood (dry basis), or 36% of the annual U.S. timber harvest, is used each year in manufacturing paper and paperboard
36% is small trees that could still be in the ground. Sometimes this is from those surrounding old growth, but it is commonly from out-skirting areas or the way in, and could be avoided.
First, your just assuming that the only use for pulpwood is toilet paper. “Wasted” is figurative with the context above.
No… i assume its all paper produced by wood pulp.
36% is small trees that could still be in the ground. Sometimes this is from those surrounding old growth, but it is commonly from out-skirting areas or the way in, and could be avoided.
In managed tree plantation, one stratgey is to plant trees very densely so the planted trees smothers out any competition. Once they get about 15-20 years, the forest is thinned, producing tons of pulpwood. Leaving the rest to mature for lumber. Some managed forests are exclusively grown for pulpwood and clear cut every 20 years, but those are less common.
Environment wise, young trees consume more CO2 than old growth forests. The downside it creates large vast monoculture forests devoid of a diverse ecosystems.
So again, its not the problem of paper production… its the lumber industry and their unsustainable practices.
I switched to Bamboo toilet paper. Renewable, saves old growth trees, and when bought in bulk online is as cheap as Walmart.
Almost all paper comes from byproducts if the lumber industry or recycled. Its the processes of papermaking that have huge impacts to the environment.
Yeah, TP is renewable by design, since it comes from trees. Being from a grass like bamboo doesn’t change that, and bamboo isn’t absorbent, so I’m very concerned about the process they’re using to produce something that’s supposed to be somewhat absorbent.
Bamboo is great for TP, and since the first NRDC report (mentioned in my other response which shows my comment has data behind it) shows the shift to using bamboo fibers in many major brands, too.
Personally, I find bamboo way better than recycled (and bamboo use vs tree use is perfectly sustainable, bamboo grows faster than it can be farmed). We find the brand we use comparable to Charmin “normal” paper (not the overly plush stuff). Happy to recommend a brand to try if asked, but don’t want to sound like a shill/advert. Plenty out there on a search 😉
Also, don’t negate a bidet.
Data? The NRDC says otherwise. They do a report every year on virgin forest use in Canada. https://www.nrdc.org/resources/issue-tissue
For the record, it tracks recycling use, renewable fiber use, and bleaching. I think you’re minimizing the impact.
Noone is going to virgin forests to send logs straight to a paper mill unless they are too small for the saw mills (byproducts of clear cut logging). The logs are far more valuable as lumber. But the byproducts are chiped and sent to paper mills so nothing is wasted. Your source is completely missing that point and not directing the enegry to the real culprit. Logging in virgin forests is no doubt a problem, but noone is logging them exclusively for paper.
First, your just assuming that the only use for pulpwood is toilet paper. “Wasted” is figurative with the context above.
But more importantly, from your quote:
36% is small trees that could still be in the ground. Sometimes this is from those surrounding old growth, but it is commonly from out-skirting areas or the way in, and could be avoided.
No… i assume its all paper produced by wood pulp.
In managed tree plantation, one stratgey is to plant trees very densely so the planted trees smothers out any competition. Once they get about 15-20 years, the forest is thinned, producing tons of pulpwood. Leaving the rest to mature for lumber. Some managed forests are exclusively grown for pulpwood and clear cut every 20 years, but those are less common.
Environment wise, young trees consume more CO2 than old growth forests. The downside it creates large vast monoculture forests devoid of a diverse ecosystems.
So again, its not the problem of paper production… its the lumber industry and their unsustainable practices.
Not old-growth. Irrelevant to the stats and report.
You are quite dense.