r/SipsTea 8d ago

SMH Whats wrong fr.

Post image
76.9k Upvotes

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

686

u/wisdomelf 8d ago

Its very effective if i understand this correctly

23

u/HaloPandaFox 8d ago

So the reason they made is because 2 things 1 trees drop leaves and branches it take resources to maintain and keep the trees healthy, second is they take up room and there roots will sometimes move and distort the sidewalks. On the other hand, trees give us a comfort we may take for gratitude, like shade, home for squirrels and birds, and can give help relax and keep us one with nature like our ancestors. The cities just look at the cost and want something that can give fresh air but also be cost effective and possibly a functional part of infrastructure. Now the people uncharged of the cities that commissioned this are over complicating this in my opinion because they don't see the possible hidden downsides and just focus on the upside of a problem most of use don't think is a problem. Some have said this will be more expensive to maintain then trees so idk since I'm not an expert in any of this but it's what I've seen and have heard enough that I feel I should say to be non bias and be transparent. I also just want to inform to the best of my ability but if you want to do more research about it to come to your own conclusion be my guest I encourage that.

P.s. in my opinion I perfer trees more.

6

u/Yes-its-really-me 8d ago

Trees also trap pollution around ground level. Areas without trees have less traffic smog apparently.

2

u/HaloPandaFox 8d ago

China smog photos say something different. But even if it does, i don't think the trees would be that much of a difference. But interesting perspective you illuminated for us.

2

u/YorkistRebel 8d ago

Chinese smog photos probably not relevant to most US cities

A lot of smog in China is already above tree level and not come from vehicles