4 ms·

"find a way to suck co2 out of the atmosphere and place it somewhere" That's what forests do, and we're cutting them down with alacrity. Also, I don't think y

"find a way to suck co2 out of the atmosphere and place it somewhere" That's what forests do, and we're cutting them down with alacrity. Also, I don't think you're done the "number of humans" x "energy consumption of suv + mcmansion" + "carbon density of likely fuel sources" math yet. It is simply impossible to sustain.

salesguy222 10y ago
I am not pro SUV or pro mcmansion i am pro forest
- throwaway5752 10y ago
  Me too! Wasn't implying otherwise :)
  - salesguy222 10y ago
    Sweet!! It is a funny situation, isn't it? We have a natural organism that does quite literally suck CO2 out of the air and replace it with O2, which we just so happen need to breathe. and yet many actors from many different societal origins are chopping down trees for furniture, building, fuel, etc etc. If the answer is as simple as "hire a bunch of people to plant trees", then it makes one wonder why money hasn't been diverted for this either at a governmental or charity level
nikdaheratik 10y ago
More trees and plant cover can help in the short term, but it's not going to solve the long term problem because those trees will break down and release the CO2 they've captured. This wasn't always the case as the ability for microbes and fungi to break down trees evolved later, which is how many of those coal deposits were created in the first place. The main benefits from forest are habitats for wildlife, prevention of erosion, and ways to improve biodiversity. Their benefits to climate change are limited to reduced sunlight absorption because of their higher reflectivity and a small amount of a carbon sink if they take over land that was cleared and turned into plains, or farms or whatever.
- throwaway5752 10y ago
  Yup, fully aware of the Carboniferous period. But in a world with fungi, the CO2 is still trapped as the living trees and as trees die they are replaced with new ones. There is a steady state equilibrium.

salesguy222 10y ago

I am not pro SUV or pro mcmansion i am pro forest

throwaway5752 10y ago
Me too! Wasn't implying otherwise :)
- salesguy222 10y ago
  Sweet!! It is a funny situation, isn't it? We have a natural organism that does quite literally suck CO2 out of the air and replace it with O2, which we just so happen need to breathe. and yet many actors from many different societal origins are chopping down trees for furniture, building, fuel, etc etc. If the answer is as simple as "hire a bunch of people to plant trees", then it makes one wonder why money hasn't been diverted for this either at a governmental or charity level

nikdaheratik 10y ago

More trees and plant cover can help in the short term, but it's not going to solve the long term problem because those trees will break down and release the CO2 they've captured. This wasn't always the case as the ability for microbes and fungi to break down trees evolved later, which is how many of those coal deposits were created in the first place. The main benefits from forest are habitats for wildlife, prevention of erosion, and ways to improve biodiversity. Their benefits to climate change are limited to reduced sunlight absorption because of their higher reflectivity and a small amount of a carbon sink if they take over land that was cleared and turned into plains, or farms or whatever.

throwaway5752 10y ago
Yup, fully aware of the Carboniferous period. But in a world with fungi, the CO2 is still trapped as the living trees and as trees die they are replaced with new ones. There is a steady state equilibrium.