The amount of trees killed to build this monstrosity is infuriating.
would concrete be preferable? was it unused or used as a rich mans palace. I kinda assume it was like hotel as most things like this end up in that kinda way.
Seems not the bad to be honest. But ive only read the wikipedia article. I dunno much about this center
Local Portland resident, the center is very well run and right next to the Oregon Zoo.
It wouldnt have burned down. Checkmate.
I don’t understand the problem with concrete. What are we supposed to build things out of?
The problem with concrete is that its usage emits a lot of CO2 and it’s not really recyclable whereas wood, as long as you plant new trees, is roughly CO2 neutral and easy to recycle.
Obligatory reminder that tree plantations aren’t equal to old-growth forest. So the latter needs to be left alone.
also iirc it requires special beach sand, which means that beaches around the world are being harvested.
Angular sand, which supply of is environmentally limited leading to black markets: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sand-mafias-are-plundering-the-earth/
Where does the CO2 come from?
Seems like it would be easy to capture, just no one makes the concrete companies do it.
Concrete is extremely recyclable. Like, more than Aluminum even.
Last I heard concrete was recycled by simply using the rubble as stones to throw into new concrete. Usually sorted by size to adhere to certain regulations or something but never without new concrete. Can you give me a source for anything else?
How is that not recycling?
The issue is that you still need lots of new concrete this way. You don’t end up with a circle of your resources.
It’s not a bad idea but it isn’t climate neutral unless you come up with a climate neutral way to mix new concrete.
Marble. Greek this shit up
it has a carbon footprint and building from wood sequestors it for a time. Not saying its necessarily better but its not a bad building material.
Cross-laminated timber and bricks.
Which I’m sure are not appropriate in many cases but it’s what I could think of 🤷🏼
bricks - fired clay?
Ye, good ol’ bricks.
I feel the same in a way too and wish much more land with that old growth was still around for everyone to see what it was like and experience the ancient trees and rest of the ecosystems before human damage
Giant ancient trees,
Stood millions of years before,
Homo sapiens
Exactly
The amount of trees killed for the log cabin part is 54, but I can’t find a source for the amount of lumber in the framed upper segment.
As opposed to what other renewable building material?
My objection is that this is clearly built from massive old growth trees. These may technically be renewable compared to oil but they really aren’t in practicality since it takes multiple lifetimes for trees to grow that large. I don’t have an issue with using younger trees and replacing them but once you’ve seen an old growth forest irl, you realize how tragic it is that most of them were cut down.
So?
What happens when a tree reaches the end of its life cycle? It falls down and maybe damages other trees as well.
There’s nothing wrong with sustainable removal of old growth.
Or the land was needed for whatever was being built and they used the trees for this instead of wasting them.
You’re complaining over nothing with no context.
Ironic, given that you are ignoring the historical context of this photo to make a weak point. When a tree falls, it contributes back to the ecosystem throughout its death and decay. The land wasn’t needed for anything beyond the standard manifest destiny development of the hotel. These trees were specifically cut down for their lumber, they would not have been wasted because they wouldn’t have been felled otherwise. Moreover this was long before anyone was planning long term sustainability goals. This was in no way sustainable removal of old growth.
The builders would’ve loved being able to play survival games with building mechanics.
