Genetically modified tree

Examples include resistance to certain pests, diseases, environmental conditions, and herbicide tolerance, or the alteration of lignin levels in order to reduce pulping costs.

[23] However, it is argued that reductions in lignin may compromise the structural integrity of the plant, thereby making it more susceptible to wind, snow, pathogens and disease,[24] which could necessitate pesticide use exceeding that on traditional plantations.

This approach was to introduce chemically labile linkages instead (by inserting a gene from the plant Angelica sinensis), which allows the lignin to break down much more easy.

Increased water and soil nutrient demand from faster growing species may lead to irrecoverable losses in site productivity and further impinge upon neighbouring communities and ecosystems.

[46] There is concern with these developments, particularly because the pesticide producing trait may impart a positive selective advantage on the poplar, allowing it a high level of invasiveness.

Living Carbon’s mission is to leverage technology to combat climate change while promoting biodiversity and restoring degraded ecosystems.

Early field trials indicated that these trees achieved a 53% increase in above-ground biomass compared to control groups, enabling them to absorb 27% more carbon.

[49] The company generates revenue by selling carbon credits derived from these forests to individuals and businesses seeking to offset greenhouse gas emissions.

[50] Supporters of Living Carbon’s approach highlight its potential to contribute to global climate solutions, particularly if deployed on a large scale.

The modified trees are targeted for use in afforestation and reforestation projects on degraded land, where they can aid in carbon capture and ecosystem restoration without displacing native species.

Critics, including some forestry and genetic experts, question whether the trees will meet carbon absorption expectations outside controlled laboratory settings.

Concerns have also been raised about the potential ecological risks, such as the unintended spread of genetically modified traits to wild tree populations, which could disrupt native ecosystems.

[52][53] Maddie Hall, co-founder of Living Carbon, has addressed these concerns, emphasizing the urgency of climate action and the limitations of waiting for natural evolutionary processes to improve tree resilience.

However, experts note that achieving success in lab or greenhouse trials does not guarantee similar outcomes in complex, natural environments.