4 ms·
The thing is, if you wait long enough, CO2 will be removed by the plant life anyway so removing it is "free". However if you reflect the price of the removal pr
by artificialidiot 8y ago
The thing is, if you wait long enough, CO2 will be removed by the plant life anyway so removing it is "free". However if you reflect the price of the removal process which is as _fast_ as it is emitted to the consumer, someone gonna pay through the nose...
- bryanlarsen 8y agoPlants release carbon when they rot or are otherwise eaten. So they're only a temporary carbon store.
- vonmoltke 8y agoThree points on this: - Increasing total plant biomass increases the amount if carbon trapped in that portion of the cycle at any given time - When plants decay or are eaten, some of the carbon compounds created are solids. Carbon itself is not the problem, carbon-based gases are. - Some portion of plant biomass is harvested by humans for durable purposes, such as wood and textiles. These uses hold carbon for much longer. I don't know what the total affect of these is, but they shouldn't be ignored.
- adrianN 8y ago"Long enough" is unfortunately very long because a large part of the fossile CO2 we emit will remain in the atmosphere until it is sequestered back underground by geological processes. These take thousands of years.
- artificialidiot 8y agoThat is exactly my point.
- jwr 8y ago> if you wait long enough, CO2 will be removed by the plant life anyway so removing it is "free" This is a very dangerous misconception and should not be spread around. It is like saying "I don't have to worry about my emissions, because someone else will clean them up for me". Do you have/support enough plant life to clean up your own emissions?
- artificialidiot 8y agowhat part of scare quotes didn't you understand? oh right...