9 ms·
> Instead it'd be sent to a landfill and decay at which point its stored carbon would be released. Even then it's still carbon neutral. Or am I missing somethi
by perfunctory 7y ago
> Instead it'd be sent to a landfill and decay at which point its stored carbon would be released.
Even then it's still carbon neutral. Or am I missing something?
Or, since carbon is gonna be released anyway, we could burn it and make some energy as a bonus.
- kaybe 7y agoApart from the energy used in harvesting, transport and construction (if not carbon-neutral), yes. However, what you actually do is add a new carbon sink, with a flux in and a flux out, just like the eco-system, the ocean, the atmosphere etc. As long as you keep the outflow lower or equal than the inflow it's a net win. Edit: Another point - we might not be in a position to think about this at the moment, but we should not store all available carbon in rock form (some of the carbon sequestration ideas lead to rockform carbon basically) because our descendents may really need it one day.