They already need to rebuild (checks notes…) all of LA. This year’s wildfire season should be interesting…
No disagreement about the wildfire season coming up, but “all of LA” didn’t burn down. Bit of hyperbole. Definitely some structure loss (especially in Palisades fire) and lots of burn scar in the wilderness areas adjacent, but LA is huge.
Frankly we should have been putting export taxes on lumber all along. Or we could just charge higher stumpage fees, but at least we can justify that as minimizing input costs on housing. It’s insane that we blindly leave all profit to private business harvesting public resources in a manner optimized for volume.
We effectively are subsidizing our forestry sector just so it can undercut a U.S. private forestry industry that is, as far as I can tell, healthier in both ecological and market terms.
I don’t understand how this works.
So America imports wood from Canada. Does Canada have to pay the 34% tariff on the wood Canada exports to America?
Wouldn’t this stop Canada from exporting its wood to the States because it’s now more expensive? America needs the lumber for building.
America would have to start harvesting its own wood or pay more for Canadian wood?
Wouldn’t the tariff hurt America more than it hurts Canada?
So America imports wood from Canada. Does Canada have to pay the 34% tariff on the wood Canada exports to America?
Americans pay the tariff when importing the wood.
Wouldn’t this stop Canada from exporting its wood to the States because it’s now more expensive? America needs the lumber for building.
It will be more expensive for Americans.
America would have to start harvesting its own wood or pay more for Canadian wood?
They do harvest their own wood. The problem is that our wood is better for building homes with, because our wood has tighter growth rings (due to shorter growing seasons). That means the wood is structurally stronger and less likely to warp or twist.
Wouldn’t the tariff hurt America more than it hurts Canada?
Yup, but Trump is an idjit, so …
Thanks for explaining. Crazy.
Why is it that North America is the only place In america that builds with wood instead of cement?
Wood is much cheaper than concrete block, and is much faster to build with. A standard house wall, say 20ft long and 8 ft high (1 storey) would require approximately 20 2x6 and 4 sheets of plywood. Thats approximately $220 in materials at big box store prices (so much less for builders). In comparison, just the blocks for the cinder block wall (8"x16") are $900, plus mortar.
To cut studs, nail, raise the wall, and add plywood is a two man job for ~2-4hrs, assuming no windows or doors. That is easily a job for a few days if you use cinder blocks.
North America is where wood is cheap and plentiful. It’s also more sustainable anyway. There’s even been some moves to go back to wood in larger structures, using processing techniques that reduce its flammability.
Also since South America is the only other place in america, it might be more insightful to frame the question around that.
There is Central America and South America, both use concrete.
I can’t get my head around the fact that wood is cheap in North America? Is it because is a different kind of wood that the one you can find in the Amazon for example?
I can’t speak to the construction value of wood species that grow in the Amazon, aside from it being home to some species that are prized for high-end uses but are most definitely not sustainable or even economical to harvest at the scale needed for construction anyway.
But North America is covered with temperate forests loaded with a mix of hardwood and softwood, and boreal forest above that that are predominantly softwood. The hardwood species available have really good structural and furniture making properties while growing relatively fast (for large hardwoods). Most (virtually all) of the construction lumber is softwood, which grows very fast. It has no value for furniture nor is great for large beams and such, but it’s quite suitable for plywood, studs, and leftovers that make good structural sheet goods, paper products, etc. It also gets used as a substrate for hardwood veneers, stretching the dearer hardwood way farther.
What’s more, harvesting softwood is super easy. The ground is mostly firm and relatively flat, so large machinery can just roll in and start yoinking trunks, which are also pretty straight and tall. It’s relatively trivial to pile them onto a truck for transport to the nearest sawmill. The only processing done in-situ is stripping the branches which don’t make up much of the material – I don’t know if the branches are even collected for byproduct inputs.
Boreal and temperate forests can replace sustainably harvested softwood in as little as 30 years. Even shitty clear cutting methods are ready for the next clear cut in 50 years if seedlings are actively planted. That’s how a company like Irving can lay waste to the countryside and then brag about what great environmentalists they are because they plant so many trees. 🙄
Might be because North America is dominated by two very geographically large countries, so transportation is a big factor in our construction. Could also be tradition, and work experience.
No, the American importer would pay the taxes. It’s why people have been saying “tarrifs are a tax on your own people” for months now. They know the American people will hurt the most.
It affects Canada because then American businesses have less money to buy goods with. Lose-lose situation for everyone except for the rich getting the tax cuts elsewhere.
Well that’s too bad.
I don’t understand how this works.
Actually, you understand how it works just fine. It’s they who misunderstand.
The system of getting cheap materials from Canada (and more) for their industries was a tremendously good system for the US.
Likewise being the recipient of a “brain drain” where educated and trained people from Canada and other countries was insanely good for the US. I worked for a major US tech company and well over half of their technical staff was educated outside the US.
Their greed and idiocy is our gain. We can use our own timber, our own oil and hydro power, our own minerals. We can invite the Canadians and other foreigners who want to leave the US to found and join innovative firms here instead.
It’s a great time to build in Canada then. Hope we won’t lose jobs over it.
It feels all but inevitable that we will lose many jobs. We have to brace for significant disruption across many industries.
The trick will be to replace the jobs we do lose with better ones, jobs not dependent on the whims of fickle American overlords. However it feels like turmoil will be inevitable.
The company which is importing the lumber will last the tariffs. Yes it will hurt them.
That’s too bad. Especially for anyone who planned to build this year.
Put an export tariff on potash already.
If Murican clowns want to log their national parks instead of buying our lumber - fine!! JFC Muricans are stupid. Yet another epic self own! Add it to the pile!
More surprised it took this long for lumber. We’ve been fighting to get lumber tariffs down for decades.
That said, the US is going to find everything to have to do with wood, especially for building houses, to skyrocket. Even the smaller tariff increase a few years ago added something like 10-20% to all housing projects the same year.
Didn’t the Americans just declare 50% of their national parks fit for logging which is a tragedy in itself but would solve the problem? If they have enough machinery, personell and manufacturing for the steps beyond killing a tree
I haven’t heard specifics, but it entirely depends on where it is. A lot of US national parks are literally in the middle of nowhere, so if there isn’t any accessible roads to them, the entire idea is pointless. No logging company will make the trip offroad since doing so will be most costly than the logging areas they already use.
I hope Americans are OK with more expensive Charmin….
Our exported softwood lumber is used mostly for building, not wood pulp for paper mills.
Are you calling Charmin rough and wood like?
I hate Charmin. Its coarse, and irritating, and it gets everywhere.
I’ve never formed an opinion on a brand of toilet paper. Maybe I’m living my life all wrong.
Not even the thin “poke your finger through” sheets in school bathrooms and corporate offices? Everyone can at least agree to hate those
I don’t have a problem with those. Just use 3 or 4 times more length and you’ll be fine. I’m not sure how that saves money, but it keeps the custodial staff busy replacing rolls…
Welp, there goes the quality of the wood in the US!
