3 ms·
The point is that a stable forest neither absorbs nor emits net carbon, so if we want to reduce/reverse the rate at which carbon in the atmosphere is growing we
by jessriedel 10y ago
The point is that a stable forest neither absorbs nor emits net carbon, so if we want to reduce/reverse the rate at which carbon in the atmosphere is growing we need an ongoing net carbon sink. Solid C02 storage can potentially provide this.
- masklinn 10y ago> The point is that a stable fotest neither absorbs nor emits net carbon so if we want to reduce/reverse the rate at which carbon in the atmosphere is growing we need an ongoing net carbon sink. Solid C02 storage can potentially provide this. Growing forests are carbon sinks, until the forest stops growing (and it becomes a carbon store)...
- jessriedel 10y agoYes of course, but unlike solid storage, there isn't nearly enough feasible areas to grow forest for a long-term solution.
- BurningFrog 10y agoI would (non sarcastically) like to see the numbers behind that.
- jessriedel 10y agoHuman carbon emissions are currently about 10 billion tons annually (10 Gt/yr), which equates to about 40 Gt/yr of C02. http://www.wri.org/blog/2013/11/carbon-dioxide-emissions-fossil-fuels-and-cement-reach-highest-point-human-history http://www.wri.org/blog/2013/11/carbon-dioxide-emissions-fos... Total carbon stored worldwide in biomass, dead wood, and soil is about 640 Gt. ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/i0105e/i0105e04.pdf Of the 550 Gt of carbon humans induced into the atmosphere since 1870, 390 Gt was emitted directly (through burning, cement production, etc), and only 160 Gt was through deforestation and other land use change.