4 ms·
This can be helpful, but it's still a shortsighted solution. There are two types of carbon cycle on the planet: the short-term and the long-term [1]. The only
by namirez 7y ago
This can be helpful, but it's still a shortsighted solution. There are two types of carbon cycle on the planet: the short-term and the long-term [1].
The only natural mechanisms to transfer carbon between the two cycles are the planet's tectonic and volcanic activities. This has changed in recent history and we are constantly extracting carbon buried underground (long cycle) and release it into the atmosphere (short cycle). Capturing the atmospheric carbon into trees can be helpful, but it still remains on the surface.
The real solution is to stop burning fossil fuels altogether.
[1] https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/CarbonCycle https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/CarbonCycle
- StavrosK 7y agoI mean, it sounds like the real real solution is to bury trees deep inside the earth.
- namirez 7y agoAgreed! Eventually, some form of carbon sequestration is necessary.
- AnthonyMouse 7y ago> I mean, it sounds like the real real solution is to bury trees deep inside the earth. Which is effectively what oil and coal are. Hence why we need to stop digging them up and burning them first. It doesn't make a lot of sense to dig a deep hole to extract carbon from the ground at the same time and you're digging a different deep hole to put it back in, when you could save yourself a lot of trouble and just leave it there. (And burn the wood to generate electricity if that's cheaper than alternatives like solar and nuclear, which it isn't.)
- zubspace 7y agoWould be interesting to know what you think of project Vesta [1]. Their approach involves weathering olivine on beaches to speed up the long-term carbon cycle. [1] https://projectvesta.org/ https://projectvesta.org/
- avip 7y agoI would be interested in knowing who is coordinating the Vesta spam attack, and why. EW could hardly be called "a technology" as of today. http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/2018/05/enhanced-weathering-factsheet/ http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/2018/05/enhanced-weathe...
- zubspace 7y agoThank you for putting project Vesta into perspective. As a layman in this field I can only observe, that topics regarding climate change and carbon sequestration appear alot more frequently here than a year before. I can only guess, that more people are realizing that there's a need for change. But there's no clear path forward. So every project providing even a small chance for success gets into the news. I don't know if that is good or bad, but it's fricking hard to get a good picture of the current situation and what projects are worth investing in...
- avip 7y agoYes they appear more frequently as people (finally!) understand that CC is not a "projected future" but a rapidly deteriorating present. I'm kind of worried we're getting lots of CC propaganda though. I usually consult project drawdown or IPCC for facts-check.
- lucb1e 7y agoSame here, I'm having a hard time telling which one will actually help. The one that seems most promising to me is Climeworks. I wrote a bit more about what they told me in another comment last week: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20544179 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20544179
- avip 7y agoDAC definitely shows potential. But do note the numbers: climeworks, GlobalThermostat and CarbonEngineering combined sequester few thousand metric tons/year - less than the output of 500 Americans.
- specialist 7y agoCan we just drop these trees (organic matter) into subduction zones? I've assumed carbon capture would be implemented by burying it. Maybe even pump it back underground, to also help counteract subsidence. Or really far-fetched is making misc kinds of bricks.