5 ms·

I'm more worried about bio-diversity loss than carbon offset tbh. This is purposefully framing the issue in a way to steer the conversation away from what reall

• eecc 6y ago
  Purposefully? That’s a charged accusation, can you substantiate it?
• brutusborn 6y ago
  And "really matters" is just an opinion. Can you say why carbon offset doesn't really matter or why bio-diversity loss really does? I'm genuinely curious.
  • danielheath 6y ago
    We are currently extinguishing biodiversity at a rate close to 100k years per year (that is, recovery-via-evolution of the biodiversity lost in any recent year will take 100k years). Some of that biodiversity isn’t load-bearing (that is, we can do fine without it), but some of it is and we will be paying for it’s loss essentially-forever.
  • Rexxar 6y ago
    Carbon offset can be done somewhere else or later, biodiversity is lost forever.
  • brabel 6y ago
    It seems the carbon footprint of even losing the entire Amazon Forrest is actually small: "In various modelling studies the risk of Amazon dieback gradually grows above2oC and becomes significant in the 3 to 5oC range, but will still take 100-200 years to fully play out..." "The total Amazon carbon sink is estimated to be 150-200 gigatonnes of carbon (GtC), with a maximum forest dieback to savannah estimated to release 53-70 GtC and raise atmospheric CO2 by 25-33 ppm (which is enough to cause up to ~0.15oC of warming if none of the CO2 was re-sequestered)" https://climatetippingpoints.info/2019/04/15/fact-check-do-tipping-points-and-feedbacks-commit-us-to-rapid-catastrophic-warming/ https://climatetippingpoints.info/2019/04/15/fact-check-do-t...