[GS] Planting Trees

[Victoria]

So if I manage to Chop all the Cattle resources on the map would that 'reverse' game Climate Change?

Do you know how much methane vegans create?
You are replacing one polluter with another... according to QI Kangaroos fart the least (all that jumping and it probably helps to have some buoyancy)
It is about the amount of vegetable matter eaten... if we destroy all the vegetable matter in the world then no methane is produced....hence deforestation is good!

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Do you know how much methane vegans create?
You are replacing one polluter with another... according to QI Kangaroos fart the least (all that jumping and it probably helps to have some buoyancy)
It is about the amount of vegetable matter eaten... if we destroy all the vegetable matter in the world then no methane is produced....hence deforestation is good!

Actually, cows are Vegans by strict definition, so I would be removing one set of Vegans to force Omnivores to become Vegans. Given the difference in methane production between one 75 - 100 kg human and one 500 - 1000 kg cow, on a one for one basis I'd be gaining.

And remember, everybody, two things about the entire Climate Debate:

1. You cannot Destroy Ecology. You only change the ecology into an ecology that won't support you.

2. IF the most dire Climate Change prognosticators are correct, then you don't have to worry about the verdict of History, either - whatever History there is, will be written by Someone other than Humans.

- And I can't think of many potential candidates that will have much good to say about us, regardless of the Climactic Outcome. . .

Back to In-Game Climate Change: someone obviously has to rummage through the Game Files or do some serious late-game experimenting to see what factors other than simple Emissions are modeled, if any. I seriously doubt if Methane Production from Veganic Sources is included, but offsets from tree planting or 'regreening' is a legitimate question, and if it's not modeled now, it probably should be.

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: Please discuss in game issues, not current events. Back to topic or the thread will be closed.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Victoria]

someone obviously has to rummage through the Game File

we have done some testing. There is carbon weight attributed to coal, oil and uranium. If in a turn you only use 1/16 of a uranium rod, the whole rod is counted for that turn. Only the fuel actually used adds to the footprint but in whole usage units as said. This is finally modded by a deforestation % which starts at -20% modifier.
That seems to be all there is, some weird stuff happens with power plant auras where you will burn coal instead of uranium because you have more of it.

 

[Halcyan2]

That's because I have cut down so much rain forest in my games that it affects yours too.

I realize that it depends on what the other civs have done.

But I've already planted 30+ trees in my territory. The other civs must have done some really heavy deforestation.

Haha. Instead of warring for pillaging, cities or liberation, maybe there should be more wars for environmentalism! Conquer cities temporarily, wipe out the improvements so you can plant trees, and then return the tree-ful cities after the war....

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

... Instead of warring for pillaging, cities or liberation, maybe there should be more wars for environmentalism! Conquer cities temporarily, wipe out the improvements so you can plant trees, and then return the tree-ful cities after the war....

Now, a mechanism that really made 'reforestation' a viable Climate Amelioration Mechanism could make for a much more interesting Information/Future Era. Seems like a missed opportunity to me...

There's also the point that 'cultivating' and even planting forests and rainforests was the Alternative Agriculture tech used in the Pre-Columbian Americas:
1. A large percentage of the Amazon Rain Forest is not natural distribution - it was planted.
2. The forests of northeastern America were described by the early English (John Smith, for one) as 'open and park-like' - because the natives had burned out underbrush and generally 'cultivated' the forest into a pattern more conducive to their 'garden' planting techniques and hunting.
3. In California, the early Spanish thought the coastal scrub oak groves were natural - no one realized until much later that the California Natives had planted the oaks because they knew how to leach the acid out of acorns and grind them up as a grain-substitute for flour. They should have been described as Oak Orchards (in Game Terms, Oak Plantations!)

In short, not only for Climate Change fighting, but as a broader representative of potential 'agriculture', we should be able to do a lot more with Forests and Rain Forests than the game allows now.

 

[Dr. Lothar]

Hi! Why can't I plant trees in the hex below? It is grasslands and not next to a lake. I play Civ 6 without any expansions.

1. Because it is City-State territory? I should be able to improve their tiles as Suzerain?
2. There is hidden resource on the hex? The fandom wiki does not exclude this : "You can place districts, Wonders, and even cities on tiles which contain unrevealed strategic resources - in this case, upon discovering the relevant technology, you will gain use of the resource as if it were already improved. However, if there is a tile improvement on top of a strategic resource that doesn't match it (e.g. you have a Farm on a Niter resource), you will need to remove it and build the right improvement to access the resource."
3. There is a city in the next hex?

or that there is a hidd
444

 

[criZp]

could have been a forest there before, and therefore it doesn't allow you to make another one after that last one got cut down. I'm not sure if it works that way, I rarely cut down.

 

[Arithmion]

No need to test, @Tech Osen ! I happened to trip over the answer many moons ago.

My evidence is anecdotal, but I did try this once. I can say with about 90% certainty that there is no global cooling. I ran carbon recapture at a very extreme amount (6 high production cities in a "tall" game). The "turns until melt" clock was at 4, and I got it to run "backwards" in a sense to something like 77. The coasts stayed flooded, even though my lifetime Co2 emissions were at 50-ish. Since my evidence is not backed by hard data, I cannot say 100% definitively that global cooling is impossible. But to even have a chance, one would have to be miles ahead in tech to keep CPUs from contributing at all, and one would have to be actively trying to prolong the game, being the only civilization capable of producing CO2, getting the ocean to rise on one's own, then stopping at the cutoff, shutting off all CO2 emission completely, and running carbon recapture.

Therefore, I can say with conviction that for any purpose a player might have, global cooling is effectively impossible. Oceans cannot recede to a previous level. Only the turn clock until the next rise can be extended, though with very little new CO2 entering the atmosphere, this can be extended almost indefinitely.

 

[Victoria]

No need to test, @Tech Osen ! I happened to trip over the answer many moons ago.

Yeah, whole thing was resolved in another thread that ran parallel to this.

could have been a forest there before, and therefore it doesn't allow you to make another one after that last one got cut down. I'm not sure if it works that way, I rarely cut down.

does not work that way.

Why can't I plant trees in the hex below?

Unsure, vanilla bug? Will try to load today and look but not sure I have time.