5 ms·

> Sometimes we overlook the simplest approaches. We should plant trees. Lots of them. It's not a perfect solution That's because it's not a solution at all: h

by hh3k0 5y ago

> Sometimes we overlook the simplest approaches. We should plant trees. Lots of them. It's not a perfect solution That's because it's not a solution at all: https://www.wired.com/story/trees-regenerative-agriculture-climate-change/ https://www.wired.com/story/trees-regenerative-agriculture-c...

tastyfreeze 5y ago
Trees alone might not be. However, photosynthesis is the answer. Plants exude sugars and carbohydrates, made from atmospheric CO2, into the soil feeding massive amounts of bacteria and fungi(carbon). The bulk of carbon in the soil comes from plant exudates, not plant matter. As long as this ecosystem is healthy the carbon stays in the soil. When the soil ecosystem is healthy plants are healthier which makes everything up the food chain healthier. The majority of our crop and pasture land soil is dead. The previous year's carbon that was pumped into the soil by plants is released when tilling happens in the spring. We need to stop tilling and grow diverse, more than 8, species wherever we can. Five tenants of soil health https://youtu.be/uUmIdq0D6-A https://youtu.be/uUmIdq0D6-A NASA CO2 https://youtu.be/x1SgmFa0r04 https://youtu.be/x1SgmFa0r04
- PicassoCTs 5y ago
  Could creating algea flowering allow for large scale photosynthesis binding?
barathr 5y ago
This is all or nothing thinking. No one solution will solve everything, but trees plus emissions reductions are probably the two easiest and biggest.
- cloverich 5y ago
  Its not about that. Its about the cold hard reality: Planting tree's will not be a significant factor in fixing climate change. Its not that its worthless, its that its not worth discussing relative to the other items on the list. Because (for arguments sake) of the 20 or so other ideas we have for fixing climate change, we need roughly all of them to work, and they will all have 100-1000x the impact of planting tree's. And we don't have a concrete plan to get them going. We need focused discussion and action and a lot of innovation.
credit_guy 5y ago
Your link claims the 1 trillion tree estimate is wrong. But it doesn't propose an alternate number. Here's a back of the envelope calculation: a tree absorbs about 48 pounds of CO2/year [1], which is 22kg. So, one trillion trees absorb 22 GT/year. The world puts out 36 GT/year (or about 50 GT of CO2-equivalent if you include methane and other greenhouse gases). One trillion might not be enough, but 2 could do the trick. [1] https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2015/03/17/power-one-tree-very-air-we-breathe https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2015/03/17/power-one-tree-ve...

by hh3k0 5y ago

tastyfreeze 5y ago

Trees alone might not be. However, photosynthesis is the answer. Plants exude sugars and carbohydrates, made from atmospheric CO2, into the soil feeding massive amounts of bacteria and fungi(carbon). The bulk of carbon in the soil comes from plant exudates, not plant matter. As long as this ecosystem is healthy the carbon stays in the soil. When the soil ecosystem is healthy plants are healthier which makes everything up the food chain healthier. The majority of our crop and pasture land soil is dead. The previous year's carbon that was pumped into the soil by plants is released when tilling happens in the spring. We need to stop tilling and grow diverse, more than 8, species wherever we can. Five tenants of soil health https://youtu.be/uUmIdq0D6-A https://youtu.be/uUmIdq0D6-A NASA CO2 https://youtu.be/x1SgmFa0r04 https://youtu.be/x1SgmFa0r04

PicassoCTs 5y ago
Could creating algea flowering allow for large scale photosynthesis binding?

barathr 5y ago

This is all or nothing thinking. No one solution will solve everything, but trees plus emissions reductions are probably the two easiest and biggest.

cloverich 5y ago
Its not about that. Its about the cold hard reality: Planting tree's will not be a significant factor in fixing climate change. Its not that its worthless, its that its not worth discussing relative to the other items on the list. Because (for arguments sake) of the 20 or so other ideas we have for fixing climate change, we need roughly all of them to work, and they will all have 100-1000x the impact of planting tree's. And we don't have a concrete plan to get them going. We need focused discussion and action and a lot of innovation.

credit_guy 5y ago

Your link claims the 1 trillion tree estimate is wrong. But it doesn't propose an alternate number. Here's a back of the envelope calculation: a tree absorbs about 48 pounds of CO2/year [1], which is 22kg. So, one trillion trees absorb 22 GT/year. The world puts out 36 GT/year (or about 50 GT of CO2-equivalent if you include methane and other greenhouse gases). One trillion might not be enough, but 2 could do the trick. [1] https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2015/03/17/power-one-tree-very-air-we-breathe https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2015/03/17/power-one-tree-ve...