I’d call that being more neutral than a sink unless I’m misunderstanding you.
I consider paper a sink, because trees are actively sequestering atmospheric CO2.
I consider paper a sink, because trees are actively sequestering atmospheric CO2.
Plastic, on the other hand, is taking carbon that's already sequestered deep underground and pulling it to the surface, with an obvious net positive carbon footprint.
All that said, as far as I remember, trees are not and can not be a very major form of carbon capturing due to the available area in the globe and the amount of excess carbon we need to get rid of.
trees are not and can not be a very major form of carbon capturing
Just cut down all the forests they said! It'll be better for the environment!
That doesn't mean trees aren't extremely important in countless different ways.
Which also doesn't mean that we shouldn't use wood as a material, if it's produced with principles.
if it's produced with principles.
This documentary gives a good idea into my reasoning on why believing timber propaganda that "trees are better when cut down and regrowing" is false: