> This is literally a carbon capture business.

Even if you're not burning it the day after Christmas, it'll get chipped and composted. Some of the carbon is released in composting, some wood will remain, but with how people use mulch, I wouldn't expect it to capture carbon long enough to be interesting.

At least when I was growing up, we burned them after Christmas. Wouldn't that release the carbon? I guess some of it's still left over as ashes.

Why would you need to burn it?

The tree takes up a bunch of space. The ashes are more compact.

Plus it’s fun. We’re talking 20 ft high flames you can feel from 50 ft away.

In Ireland they are shredded for mulch.

Because you're putting most of them into the atmosphere as carbon gas!

Honest question. How would you have to dispose of the tree to capture the carbon? Burry it? Wouldn’t composting release the carbon?

You would need to either bury it in a way that it won't be decomposed by microbes. Anaerobic digestion produces methane which is ~83x worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas.

The alternative is to gasify it, and produce biochar (a.k.a terra preta), a form of carbon that is mixed with the soil to improve it's nutrient and water retention, friability and microbial activity. Biochar is theorized to be stable for 10k years in the soil.

Same way you dispose regular garbage, which has same challenges.

I went to the tour of recycling plant, and as part of the tour they told us what happens with Seattle garbage: they excavate a pit, line it up with plastic, put garbage in, cover it with plastic, put soil on top. Without supply of oxygen it basically stays there almost forever. They cut a carrot with was in such pit for 10 years. It was black on the outside, but still orange inside!

Anyway, put trees in such pits, and you have carbon capture!

Doesn’t release nearly as much as burning it.