Trees and bushes are sometimes planted along road ways or around factories to help reduce noise pollution, but just read today that the RHS would recommend cotoneaster franchetii to fight air pollution. So what other plants can be used to improve the environment
Willow trees are good for the environment Spec, often used to help land prone to flooding and the root system is very good at stabilising soil on slopes. The catkins are also beneficial to bees and butterflies
(26-03-2021, 07:25 PM)Admin Wrote: [ -> ]Willow trees are good for the environment Spec, often used to help land prone to flooding and the root system is very good at stabilising soil on slopes. The catkins are also beneficial to bees and butterflies
Loads of them willow down here on the Bog, locally called Sally’s
Many years ago when I was on holiday in central Turkey, I was told the roadsides were planted with oleander bushes because Turkish people smoked like chimneys and tossed the butts out of their car windows. Oleanders are very fire resistant apparently.
(26-03-2021, 08:07 PM)Can the Man Wrote: [ -> ] (26-03-2021, 07:25 PM)Admin Wrote: [ -> ]Willow trees are good for the environment Spec, often used to help land prone to flooding and the root system is very good at stabilising soil on slopes. The catkins are also beneficial to bees and butterflies
Loads of them willow down here on the Bog, locally called Sally’s
Sally's from Salix or Sallows, presumably.
Surly most plants are good for the environment! No plants means no pollinators, no pollinators, means no plants and no bigger beasties that feed on the plants and / or the pollinators and so on.
Obviously there’s a few exceptions to this rule. The one that springs to mind is rhododendron. Supports very little insect life & poisons the ground it grows in.
Have I over simplified things again?
Apparently rice is very good at absorbing arsenic - which is a good reason not to eat too much of it!
(27-03-2021, 08:05 AM)Small chilli Wrote: [ -> ]Surly most plants are good for the environment! No plants means no pollinators, no pollinators, means no plants and no bigger beasties that feed on the plants and / or the pollinators and so on.
Obviously there’s a few exceptions to this rule. The one that springs to mind is rhododendron. Supports very little insect life & poisons the ground it grows in.
Have I over simplified things again?
That's my thoughts too, SC. Plants absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen to enable us to breathe - that sounds good to me.
We wouldn't survive in a world without plants.
The RHS article that Spec refers to is
https://www.rhs.org.uk/science/articles/...r6fZizFHAY
The cotoneaster only traps the pollution in its hairy leaves, it doesn't absorb it or alter it, so when it rains, all that trapped particulate matter will be washed onto the soil below. Unlucky gardener! And who has room for a 2 metre deep hedge in their front garden?
(27-03-2021, 10:33 AM)Moth Wrote: [ -> ]The cotoneaster only traps the pollution in its hairy leaves, it doesn't absorb it or alter it, so when it rains, all that trapped particulate matter will be washed onto the soil below. Unlucky gardener! And who has room for a 2 metre deep hedge in their front garden?
Funnily enough, although not 2m deep we have. It's s about 4m x 1m in our front as a boundary, also one in the back. They maybe good for the environment and the bees love it but P complains bitterly when cutting, he has to wear a respirator as their dust creates havoc with his asthma - hopefully it's only dust not pollution as they're away from the road.