Silversorcerer said:
The nature of forests is cyclical. If we cut them all down at once we will die from lack of oxygen and then we won't be worried about such foolishness as music. Even if we perished this way, it is likely that the forests would return in less than 1000 yrs. They don't need much O2 to get started.
Sustainability is a separate issue. Even if we use up all the trees, eventually they will grow back, and much sooner than any fossil fuel could be naturally produced I think most players and makers would agree that walnut, mahogany, or other woods would be better substitutes than CF or other material, unless you like Ovations.
There is quite a bit of cheap energy used in the production of CF. It is not just that it involves petroleum derivitives, it requires engergy beyond what is received from the sun (the only new engery that comes to earth).
Any tree species can be responsibly harvested and most can be plantation grown. Pernambucco is related to the Black Locust and Honey Locust trees. It is actually a remnant tree from a former colder forest than the one where is currently persists. Given that, it would be a more difficult tree to grow. It doesn't even belong where it grows, if you follow me. If one were to plant the seeds in a suitable environment, it would take only as long as one cycle to maturity to establish a sustainable plantation. I believe there are already some being grown this way in Brazil. Wild harvesting could be abandoned. Spruce is a short lived tree relatively,- less than 500 yrs. It would be easy to grow these in a plantation (like Christmas tree farms in Pennsylvania, etc.) Some American furniture companies have invested in their own forests and limit harvesting. It could easily be done by musical instrument makers.
Not tons of disagreement except I dont think you can separate the sustainability aspect. I think we should use our resources, including wood and petro-chems, in a way that extends them for as long as possible. I bet if all musicians henceforth bought only CF instruments, it wouldn't appreciably affect the rate at which we use oil, so much is used for fuel (though most instruments then would really suck!
), but I fear our rate of use of good wood is outstripping our rate of replantation and time to harvest. I don't like to think that extinction, even "temporarily," of good tone woods could occur because we were too greedy to pay attention to sustainability. The stories about Communists clear-cutting so much old growth forests for the wood they put into cheap, mass-produced instruments can be pretty depressing, no?
Also, there are great woods that have disappeared due to blight. Chestnut is but one example. It would be nice to have some of that around today for wood products, though I have no idea whether it would make a nice bass
. The majestic fraser firs and hemlocks in the Great Smoky Mountains near me are badly threatened due to wooly adelgids. Imagine if the remaining stands were clear-cut, especially to use just to burn as fuel under the guise that they're more eco-friendly than oil! They'd disappear rather fast. Even the ubiquitous pines are being decimated by pine beetles. I guess where we differ is that you speak as though we are using wood responsibly. Im more pragmatic in believing that until we know that to be true, theres no real harm in using a tiny amount of oil as an alternative, if it works in certain applications and if its full life cycle costs are accounted for (including all energy that goes in, pollution, disposal costs, GH gases, etc.). If we can consume wood based on what wood farms COULD produce, cant we buy oil if we also support its real costs to be imposed?
Silversorcerer said:
And the more economically viable alternative is?????
You know the fuel palette. Solar, "nukular," coal, hydro, natural gas, etc. As oil becomes more expensive to extract (not soon enough for me), economic pressures will force power plants away from oil and consumers toward more fuel efficient vehicles, while the alternate sources (domestic clean renewables, I hope) will get relatively cheaper until theres a cost crossover. Then the extraction of oil will sharply decrease. But theyll still be oil in the ground for those who want to pay for it (few, I hope.) But by then maybe theyll be pernambucco and ebony farms, so we wont need or want the CF versions, right? I sincerely hope so.
like that (more tongue-in-cheek 
