5 ms·

I am not an expert on this but I assume the total amount of carbon on the earth is essentially constant. I am guessing for the most part it exists on earth as (

by gpsx 11y ago

I am not an expert on this but I assume the total amount of carbon on the earth is essentially constant. I am guessing for the most part it exists on earth as (1) plants and other life forms (2) fossil fuels and (3) other non-living stored carbon, in things like plastics and lumber. In the air it is mainly carbon dioxide. The more we store on earth the less there will be in the air. Maybe we need a plant and trade system rather than cap and trade. Whenever fossil fuels are sold, a corresponding amount of carbon must be stored, either through new plants of in other sequestered carbon.

cschneid 11y ago
You're describing one form of carbon offsets. A cap & trade system is pretty much what you're suggesting, depending on the specific implementation of a cap&trade system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_offset#Land_use.2C_land-use_change_and_forestry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_offset#Land_use.2C_land...
- gpsx 11y ago
  I did not realize cap and trade systems were backed by actual carbon storage. That makes more sense then. Thanks for the link.
  - rgbrenner 11y ago
    they don't have to be.. but most cap and trade proposals include carbon offsets... so a polluter can complete an offset project OR purchase credits to pollute more.
mimac 11y ago
Do not forget rocks! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle
eru 11y ago
We mostly care about carbon accessible to the atmosphere. That's carbon directly in the atmosphere, soil and upper layers of the ocean. The depths of the ocean can take basically arbitrary amounts of extra carbon-dioxide, and if we stopped producing CO_2 now, in about two thousand years (if I remember right) the oceans would have absorbed and `buried' the extra carbon released by human activity. Of course, during the process the upper layers of the ocean acidify for a while. That's bad, too.

by gpsx 11y ago

cschneid 11y ago

You're describing one form of carbon offsets. A cap & trade system is pretty much what you're suggesting, depending on the specific implementation of a cap&trade system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_offset#Land_use.2C_land-use_change_and_forestry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_offset#Land_use.2C_land...

gpsx 11y ago
I did not realize cap and trade systems were backed by actual carbon storage. That makes more sense then. Thanks for the link.
- rgbrenner 11y ago
  they don't have to be.. but most cap and trade proposals include carbon offsets... so a polluter can complete an offset project OR purchase credits to pollute more.

mimac 11y ago

Do not forget rocks! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle

eru 11y ago

We mostly care about carbon accessible to the atmosphere. That's carbon directly in the atmosphere, soil and upper layers of the ocean. The depths of the ocean can take basically arbitrary amounts of extra carbon-dioxide, and if we stopped producing CO_2 now, in about two thousand years (if I remember right) the oceans would have absorbed and `buried' the extra carbon released by human activity. Of course, during the process the upper layers of the ocean acidify for a while. That's bad, too.