Trees in the city may not be as green as we think.
They produce rotting leaves that pollute lakes and streams with too much phosphorus. They can actually trap air pollution right at nose level. And what with watering, maintenance, and replacement when they die, they are not always an efficient way to store carbon.
In short, often "trees are oversold" as a natural solution for environmental problems in cities, according to Bonnie Keeler, a University of Minnesota professor who studies ways of valuing nature. In fact, she reviewed 1,200 scientific studies on increasingly popular green infrastructures such as urban forests, parks, rain gardens, and wetlands and found in a recent paper that it's unclear how well any of them stack up against "gray" solutions like concrete storm sewers and air conditioning.
It's an increasingly urgent question for the Twin Cities. At projects such as the Ford site in St. Paul, the Mississippi River Upper Harbor in Minneapolis and a redesign for sections of Minnehaha Creek, planners face complex choices for managing stormwater and air pollution.
The answers will help define the future for a growing share of the world's population. By 2050, two out of three people will live in urban areas that will affect their health and well-being, Keeler said. Immense social challenges like climate change, public health and public funding will have the greatest impact on people who live in cities.
"There is a huge interest in expanding funding for green infrastructures," she said. "But we don't have a tool to understand their value."
Take trees, for instance. There is no question that they are crucial to global ecosystem health. But in the city it can be a different story. Keeler's review, published last month in Nature Sustainability, found that most evaluations of urban trees focused on two benefits: filtering air and sequestering carbon. Few considered the costs of maintenance, replacement, or public health. Even their estimated ecosystem values ranged widely — from $5 to $402 per tree.
At the same time, there's no widely accepted method to calculate the more ephemeral value that trees provide, such as joy in their beauty, a resting places for birds, or the coolness of their shade.