Which is Better for Absorbing Carbon: Trees or Turf?

When it comes to sucking up carbon, trees are the real champions, but let’s not forget about turf in this important climate change game. Both trees and turf grass play an important part in capturing carbon.

First, let’s talk about trees.

Trees are awesome carbon absorbers! With their big size and weight, they take in lots of carbon dioxide and store it in their trunks, branches, roots, and leaves. A mature tree can suck up around 48 pounds of CO2 each year. They also live a long time, so they keep capturing carbon for many years.

Now, let’s give some credit to turf grass. It may not be as good as trees at carbon absorbing, but it still helps. Turf stores carbon mainly in its roots below the ground. Even though it can’t do as much as trees, well-tended turf can still capture about 0.24 pounds of CO2 per square foot each year. Not bad, right?

Turf grass is good at using space.

Trees need more room because they’re bigger and usually grow apart, while turf grass covers more ground with more plants close together. So, while each turf grass patch might not capture as much carbon as a single tree, when spread over a larger area, it adds up to a lot.

Together, trees and turf grass make a great team to fight climate change. Trees are crucial for storing lots of carbon, but we can’t ignore the contribution of turf grass.

Check out this article if you’d like to learn more specific ways about how Groundhog Landscaping and Groundhog Turf Care can partner with you to make a positive impact on the climate change and the environment.

Share This Article
Scroll to Top