Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

EqualityWithoutCiv t1_j6r6lnj wrote

We need more trees, but more importantly, we need more trees that are both suited to their environment and are diverse too, which should help withstand blights a bit better too.


UsedOnlyTwice t1_j6rd2fp wrote

Almond trees! They get a bad rap because of the farming practices and water concerns in California, but with sufficient ground cover and bee friendly practice most of that goes away. The discussion about 3 gallons per almond or whatever do not account for the chemical reactions those three gallons participate over the 2-3 decade life of the tree. They are amazing at pulling CO2 out of the atmosphere, if that's your gig. They can also utilize and filter water unsuitable for other purposes.

Almonds are very nutritious, provide an alternative to dairy, and the wood can be used for efficient cooking and heating in an emergency. The wood can also be used for cabinetry and furniture further sequestering CO2, and because they are farmed it is already renewable.

The leaves can be extracted and used in aquariums, hatcheries, and other fishy locations as an anti-fungal, darkening agent, and food source which distinctly benefits filter feeders like shrimp.


killpineapple t1_j6s0dcz wrote

I would love a chance to not hate almond trees in California. Is there something to the way they are farmed that are negative or is it just misinformation?


Sine_Habitus t1_j6saeh3 wrote

Farming in general in California uses a lot of water, which is bad because there are also a lot of people in California. If Cali was just farmers it would t be a problem, but it is trying to balance the water needs of everyone that makes it an issue.


goldgrae t1_j6sh5bz wrote

That's an asinine take. 40% of water use in California is agricultural and only 10% is urban (both indoor and outdoor). The other half of water use is environmental.

Water rights and water use incentives in agriculture are awful.


GlinnTantis t1_j6vtgn6 wrote

Loose almonds and kids with nut allergies. The city would have a hell of a law suit should a kid die from an almond they got from the park. Plenty of other non-nut bearing trees to use.


Sharlindra t1_j6wuexb wrote

There certainly are people allergic to almonds, but people are allergic to all kinds of things. (and by the way, a lot of people allergic to nuts are not actually allergic to almonds) Other things have poisonous berries, for example. And they grow all round. Here in the Netherlands, people love using poison ivy as a fence, I swear the thing is *everywhere*, it can grow anywhere and survives everything. A lot of people are allergic to even touching it, and the berries are absolutely deadly. But like I said, it is completely everywhere and it does not seem to be a problem... Not sure why almonds would be any worse tbh.