Planting trees in 23,000 hectares a year for the next 40 years — about the size of Queen's Balmoral estate, or a town the size of Kettering, Northamptonshire — would result in just an extra 4 per cent of land for trees, bringing a total of 16 per cent forest in Britain.
Professor Read said: "By increasing our tree cover we can lock up carbon directly. By using more wood for fuel and construction materials we can make savings by using less gas, oil and coal, and by substituting sustainably produced timber for less climate-friendly materials.
"While so many emission-reduction measures have negative connotations, tree planting can be a win, win, win solution: people love trees, we benefit from them in so many different ways, and now we know they could play a significant part in reducing the UK's CO2 emissions."
Hilary Benn, the Environment Secretary, said that the Government intended to work with communities and businesses to ensure that sufficient trees were planted to tackle climate change. He pledged to do more to increase forestry. "Forests and trees are an important part of the way we live and interact with our surroundings, and we cannot underestimate the role that trees will play in reducing our carbon emissions," he said.
comment from John Coleman below the article:
"Some advice,I plant trees.In my life time trees I planted 50 years ago have been cropped fencing,posts sheds etc.
The CO2 argument is nonsense for the UK.
Man should cease to fell the forests of Indonesia,Malaysia and Borneo.Been there,UK buys the timber.The natives loose their land,the financiers make a profit from the West.
Find a practical use for home grown timber other than burning it.
Cease digging up the peat on Scottish hills for expensive windmills.Leave the CO2 where it is.
Soft woods mature in plus 50 years,native hardwoods plus 100 years.
Not a slick quick solution?
Find a use for our timber?"