Skip to main content
Topic: General Discussions (Read 109048 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #240
My understanding is that younger trees 'suck in' more CO2 than older ones.  Obviously, younger trees and forests don't have as great an ecosystem.

There is a difference between French, US, Russian oak - just ask the winemakers and whiskey makers!

Re: General Discussions

Reply #241
Not “old growth” Paul, old plantations that were established to provide timber for wooden warships.

I don’t believe “old growth” forests are a thing in much of Western Europe.
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball

Re: General Discussions

Reply #242
The information that is publicly available is not thorough, so it's hard to be definitive. But the best I can determine is as follows :

1. The trees are coming from old growth forests. The number of such forests is significantly less now than when the Cathedral was built, and together with obvious knowledge about climate change and the benefits of such forests, the French should be looking elsewhere.
2. Everything that needs to be achieved can be achieved by using materials that don't come from old growth forests. All the structural integrity, all the beauty, all the fireproofing, all the intricacy can be achieved by other means.
3. There's a lot more that goes on in forests other than trees. They are full blown ecosystems in every sense of the word.
4. There is no logic in the sustainable logging argument. We could also argue that the world is overcrowded, so therefore we should knock off all those over 80, because they'll be dead soon anyway. Sustainable sapien management.
5. This is simply a vote buying exercise by Emmanuel Macarone - he doesn't want to be seen as the cheapskate who shortchanged a national treasure.
6. There is a line of thinking from William Morris, through John Ruskin, Carlo Scarpa and others, that openly frowns upon slavish imitation / reconstruction of heritage items. From the manifesto of the SPAB (Society for the Preservation of Ancient Buildings), written in 1877 by Morris, Philip Webb and others, right through to own own Burra Charter, the very conditions of the time give materials and the working and usage of those materials a unique flavour that cannot be convincingly replicated later. Those of us who remember the faux convict bricks from the 80's will know exactly what I mean - they look empty and humbug because that's exactly what they are. We build for our time, with our knowledge, our materials, our skills and our circumstances.

At least that's how I see it.
Thanks for that Pauly.
2017-16th
2018-Wooden Spoon
2019-16th
2020-dare to dream? 11th is better than last I suppose
2021-Pi$$ or get off the pot
2022- Real Deal or more of the same? 0.6%
2023- "Raise the Standard" - M. Voss Another year wasted Bar Set
2024-Back to the drawing boardNo excuses, its time

Re: General Discussions

Reply #243
Not “old growth” Paul, old plantations that were established to provide timber for wooden warships.

I don’t believe “old growth” forests are a thing in much of Western Europe.

We can argue about what constitutes "old growth" but wikipedia still lists several old growth forests in France, a number of which include Oak species.

The flying buttresses were great structural innovations (there's debate about whether they started as that, or evolved into it). Instead of simply copying the massive walls and small openings of Romanesque architecture, the Gothic builders tried advancing the form. The walls were no longer load bearing, and thus not only became thinner, but also allowed for more glass, in larger openings. Part of the inspiration for this was indeed the forest - flying buttresses mimicking the trees, and the glass mimicking the light between the tree canopies.

The French should take a cue from those masons and builders.

 


Re: General Discussions

Reply #246
https://theconversation.com/5-ways-to-spot-if-someone-is-trying-to-mislead-you-when-it-comes-to-science-138814

Well worth reading IMO.
I'm afraid this article uses the very same tactics he criticises, there are a lot of good resources for scientists to use while framing outreach and public commentary, this article might not be one of them! Maybe the author is taking the piss!

He doesn't even match written commentary to the headlines, example;

4. Overly simplistic explanations
.........................
Conspiracy theories, such as the one suggesting 5G is the cause of COVID-19, take off because they offer a simple explanation for something frightening and complex. This particular claim also feeds into concerns some people may have about new technologies.

As a general rule, when something appears too good or too bad to be true, it usually is.

I'm particularly disturbed by 3. Reference to ‘the science not being settled’. Science is never settled, consensus based on current evidence and understanding can be achieved, but the science is never settled.

If science was settled we(humanity) would be able to predict the future of many events with near perfection, but good science always reports facts in terms of probabilities not certainties!
The Force Awakens!

Re: General Discussions

Reply #247
I'm afraid this article uses the very same tactics he criticises.

You can say that again.  Ridiculous hypocrisy and reeks of patronising condescension.


Re: General Discussions

Reply #248
https://theconversation.com/5-ways-to-spot-if-someone-is-trying-to-mislead-you-when-it-comes-to-science-138814

Well worth reading IMO.

The article's author, Hassan Vally, I believe, means well... but we have an epidemiologist attempting to unpack and explain narcissistic behaviour. He's better leaving that to someone/people well trained in the 'tactics' and 'strategies' of the narcissist or narcissistic behaviour. It's not something that can be simplistically bullet-pointed to 5 strategies.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: General Discussions

Reply #249
The Notre Dame spire that burned down in 2019 is not even the original spire. The original spire became so damaged over a few centuries that it was removed - the removal was completed in 1792. The Cathedral remained "spireless" for decades until a new spire was completed in 1859. I guess it wasn't a big deal back then to leave the Cathedral without a spire for ages.

I object on principle to what is in my view a needless destruction of beautiful old trees to replace a replica.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #250
The Notre Dame spire that burned down in 2019 is not even the original spire. The original spire became so damaged over a few centuries that it was removed - the removal was completed in 1792. The Cathedral remained "spireless" for decades until a new spire was completed in 1859. I guess it wasn't a big deal back then to leave the Cathedral without a spire for ages.

I object on principle to what is in my view a needless destruction of beautiful old trees to replace a replica.

Interesting.

Just for context France back then:

In 1789 the estates general was held leading to a period know as the French revolution which lasted until roughly 1799, and in the process, the French monarchy was overthrown.  I imagine a spire was indeed quite irrelevant for the people at the time.

In 1792 was the proclamation of the first French republic.

Quote
Revolution and the church

Historian John McManners argues "in eighteenth-century France, throne and altar were commonly spoken of as in close alliance; their simultaneous collapse ... would one day provide the final proof of their interdependence." One suggestion is that after a century of persecution, some French Protestants actively supported an anti-Catholic regime, a resentment fuelled by Enlightenment thinkers such as Voltaire.[64] Philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote it was "manifestly contrary to the law of nature... that a handful of people should gorge themselves with superfluities while the hungry multitude goes in want of necessities."[65]
In this caricature, monks and nuns enjoy their new freedom after the decree of 16 February 1790.

The Revolution caused a massive shift of power from the Catholic Church to the state; although the extent of religious belief has been questioned, elimination of tolerance for religious minorities meant by 1789 being French also meant being Catholic.[66] The church was the largest individual landowner in France, controlling nearly 10% of all estates and levied tithes, effectively a 10% tax on income, collected from peasant farmers in the form of crops. In return, it provided a minimal level of social support.[67]

This would have been remarkable given the climate of France at the time, and explains the reason why it took them so long to restore the spire.

Even so, it fails to take into account that tourism is extremely important, and Notre Dame, would be one of the Parisian highlights and must do's.  I think its important we not underestimate this fact.  You are free to object on principle, but just for context, Australia during that period wasnt even a fledgling nation, it was a penal colony.

There has been an immense amount of change from 1900 to today, so thinking that the previous 100 years had very little change is fraught with danger.


Its not like they are Brazil setting fire to the Amazon in order to increase the amount of farmable land.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: General Discussions

Reply #251
The Notre Dame spire that burned down in 2019 is not even the original spire. The original spire became so damaged over a few centuries that it was removed - the removal was completed in 1792. The Cathedral remained "spireless" for decades until a new spire was completed in 1859. I guess it wasn't a big deal back then to leave the Cathedral without a spire for ages.

I object on principle to what is in my view a needless destruction of beautiful old trees to replace a replica.
Humanity and society are not witnesses beyond a lifetime.

Just curious @PaulP‍ , if the Oak came from plantations and not old growth forests would it be OK, even if those plantations are 100 or more years old, or is cutting down any living 100 year old tree morally offensive?

If so where to on green sustainability, we are told these days to use wood, paper bags, paper straws, paper fibre based cutlery, etc., etc.?
The Force Awakens!

Re: General Discussions

Reply #252
Humanity and society are not witnesses beyond a lifetime.

Just curious @PaulP‍ , if the Oak came from plantations and not old growth forests would it be OK, even if those plantations are 100 or more years old, or is cutting down any living one hundred year old tree morally offensive?

If so where to on green sustainability, we are told these days to use wood, paper bags, paper straws, paper based cutlery, etc., etc.!

My first preference would be a worldwide architectural / engineering competition calling for inventive, innovative solutions that both reflect the contemporary situation and advance the discipline further. Failing that, using recycled wood would be a much better option. I'm sure the French government can marshall its considerable resources to source top notch recycled wood. This type of approach has the potential to achieve a domino effect, and become a touchtone, a reference project for how such issues may be handled in the future.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #253
Much of the timber in my house is recycled.  However it does present its own challenges in that you are limited to what is available and what you can get. This can result in a lot of extra work in tailoring it to suit and can add quite a bit of extra cost and time. If it were used more generally then I would think supplies would be rapidly exhausted and in the meantime the demand for the skills required to work with it would skyrocket. All worth it though on a limited scale.
Reality always wins in the end.

Re: General Discussions

Reply #254
My first preference would be a worldwide architectural / engineering competition calling for inventive, innovative solutions that both reflect the contemporary situation and advance the discipline further. Failing that, using recycled wood would be a much better option. I'm sure the French government can marshall its considerable resources to source top notch recycled wood. This type of approach has the potential to achieve a domino effect, and become a touchtone, a reference project for how such issues may be handled in the future.
@PaulP You'll forgive me for asking though, but I suspect your perspective comes from more than just a spire on a single cathedral, what of the bigger picture?

Is there an acceptable solution?

If they went down your preferred competition path and the green answer was cutting 100 year old plantation oaks, is that accepted?
The Force Awakens!