Tree Carbon Sequestration Limits

Trees aren't a one-time deal.They will just release their carbon content back when they are burned or transformed in any other way that only the mineral content is left. Otherwise, paper still contains carbon. Coal (buried, not burned) contains carbon. Furniture, houses, anything you make with wood will be a way of storing carbon.You just also need to supply water and solar light. They will grow. Simple and efficient.

Tree aren't great for carbon capture. They take up land space, which then has to be reserved for those trees. Then, they eventually die, and decompose, which means a new tree has to grow to re-capture the carbon that is released when the tree decomposes. Better to put the excess carbon back underground, where it came from.

How about a cycle of cutting down a lot of trees, burying the wood and then replanting to sequester carbon ?

IIRC it does not help because the trees will decay into CO2 after they die. So you'd basically have to bury the dead treas if you want to prevent the carbon from entering the atmosphere again.

A tree cannot live forever. Once it is dead all (or almost all) accumulated carbon slowly released back into atmosphere as CO₂ by bacteria. So cutting trees and preserving them from decay is a carbon negative process in a long run.

Isn't the plant life carbon neutral? I thought whatever carbon a tree extracts during its lifetime, it releases when it decomposes. Unless we chop it down and store it (and plant a new tree!), the tree doesn't remove much carbon from the atmosphere (long term, on average). Do I misunderstand how this works?

Trees only hold carbon until they fall and rot. It's not a permanent solution.

It's not enough to plant trees. Fallen trees rot and release CO2 back in the atmosphere. You need to cut the trees down, then use lumber for building something, and bury the rest so that it does not decompose.

Trees are not a carbon processing factory, they are a carbon battery. If they die the carbon will be released again during decomposition. Once they are planted they must be maintained into perpetuity, unless they are planted where they will naturally survive. Maintaining these forests will probably involve energy usage that releases more carbon.We need method of fixation that is both permanent and does not have the constraints that tree planting does.

A single tree is likely to release its carbon at the end of its life. A forest however can permanently endure and keep retain carbon in aggregate, at least compared to the alternative barren ground. To your point though, I would be surprised if this effect is big enough relative to removing fossil fuels from the energy mix.