• poVoq@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Like the video already outlines… lots of structural issues for having trees there, while planted cascades and similar green-roofs are much simpler and easier to build. I think this is one of the cases where the result does not justify the costs/efforts required.

    • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Probably doesn’t make sense for standard residential buildings but for these tall buildings that are highly engineered, does it really increase the costs by that much? Trees offer a large increase in benefits over other types of vegetation due to the shade and many times greater biomass.

      That said, simpler green roofs should also be more widely used in cases where trees are too heavy or expensive. And vines and green walls too. I want to see the concrete jungle become an actual jungle!

      • poVoq@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That huge below surface cistern and the efforts to anchor the trees against wind would seem to add significantly to the cost over artificial shading structures with ranking plants for example.

        • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I suppose it would depend on the costs and benefits which I haven’t seen quantified. But in general those things don’t provide anywhere near the benefits trees do.