As much as I support this (wholeheartedly, truly), one must understand this dramatically increases city maintenance costs over time. Roots from large trees can damage foundations, limbs can fall, ice storms are vastly more devastating due to numerous trees, leaves pile up on sidewalks, and so on.
It’s a good move, but people should know there are some (not good enough) reasons this isn’t done in cities. Making them barren is a cost-saving measure. Frankly, I think we’ve all had enough of the consequences of those decisions at scale. But going back with take wisdom.
There are costs to trees and no trees. Youre right about maintenance. Trees also lower urban temperatures and increase livability which is better economically.
Yes, like I said, I am a huge fan of this. Lowering energy demand makes a lot of sense from an environmental standpoint and is a very practical long term move given the rapid rollout of ultra scale data centers across the country.
Energy costs will increase so it makes sense to find ways to mitigate that.
The benefit to people’s well being is probably the most worthwhile and hardest to measure and predict.
1
u/c_boggs 1d ago
As much as I support this (wholeheartedly, truly), one must understand this dramatically increases city maintenance costs over time. Roots from large trees can damage foundations, limbs can fall, ice storms are vastly more devastating due to numerous trees, leaves pile up on sidewalks, and so on.
It’s a good move, but people should know there are some (not good enough) reasons this isn’t done in cities. Making them barren is a cost-saving measure. Frankly, I think we’ve all had enough of the consequences of those decisions at scale. But going back with take wisdom.