4 ms·

In what way? Regulations that don't consider the source?

by readflaggedcomm 5y ago

moralestapia 5y ago
Because the CO2 goes back to the atmosphere.
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  Didn't the CO2 that went into the tree come from the atmosphere in the first place?
  - moralestapia 5y ago
    Yes, and life and ecological systems adapted around particular levels of it. Man put too much back in recent years (see [1]) so we'd like to take it off there because the vast majority of current research points to it being a bad thing for the weather dynamics of the planet. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere#/media/File:Carbon_Dioxide_800kyr.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_at...
    - chrisseaton 5y ago
      But if it came from the atmosphere, and goes back into the atmosphere… why isn’t it carbon net zero? Out -1, in +1, net 0. Wasted energy to harvest trees? But you also waste energy extracting fossil fuels, and offsetting carbon.
      - moralestapia 5y ago
        It is always net zero if you're pedantic and say the earth is a closed system plus conservation of matter. But the whole premise (i.e. the concern) is that there's too much CO2 as an atmospheric gas and it would be better if some of it were instead somewhere else. If you take from the atmosphere but then put it back it doesn't really help alleviate the problem.
        chrisseaton 5y ago
        > But the whole premise (i.e. the concern) is that there's too much CO2 as an atmospheric gas and it would be better if some of it were instead somewhere else. Yeah, everyone gets that. Burning wood is net zero. The point is we don't want net zero - we want net negative.
        moralestapia 5y ago
        >Burning wood is net zero. Nope, when you do that, you're moving CO2 into the atmosphere. I get your point, "but what if you somehow made that wood explicitly to burn it", but the whole idea is to sequester carbon and keep it out, remove it. Fossil fuel's CO2 also came from the atmosphere, no sane person would suggest that burning it is net zero. Whew, but looks like you have US' EPA on your side: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/epa-declares-burning-wood-carbon-neutral-180968880/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/epa-declares-burni...

In what way? Regulations that don't consider the source?

moralestapia 5y ago

Because the CO2 goes back to the atmosphere.

chrisseaton 5y ago
Didn't the CO2 that went into the tree come from the atmosphere in the first place?
- moralestapia 5y ago
  Yes, and life and ecological systems adapted around particular levels of it. Man put too much back in recent years (see [1]) so we'd like to take it off there because the vast majority of current research points to it being a bad thing for the weather dynamics of the planet. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere#/media/File:Carbon_Dioxide_800kyr.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_at...
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    But if it came from the atmosphere, and goes back into the atmosphere… why isn’t it carbon net zero? Out -1, in +1, net 0. Wasted energy to harvest trees? But you also waste energy extracting fossil fuels, and offsetting carbon.
    - moralestapia 5y ago
      It is always net zero if you're pedantic and say the earth is a closed system plus conservation of matter. But the whole premise (i.e. the concern) is that there's too much CO2 as an atmospheric gas and it would be better if some of it were instead somewhere else. If you take from the atmosphere but then put it back it doesn't really help alleviate the problem.
      - chrisseaton 5y ago
        > But the whole premise (i.e. the concern) is that there's too much CO2 as an atmospheric gas and it would be better if some of it were instead somewhere else. Yeah, everyone gets that. Burning wood is net zero. The point is we don't want net zero - we want net negative.
        moralestapia 5y ago
        >Burning wood is net zero. Nope, when you do that, you're moving CO2 into the atmosphere. I get your point, "but what if you somehow made that wood explicitly to burn it", but the whole idea is to sequester carbon and keep it out, remove it. Fossil fuel's CO2 also came from the atmosphere, no sane person would suggest that burning it is net zero. Whew, but looks like you have US' EPA on your side: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/epa-declares-burning-wood-carbon-neutral-180968880/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/epa-declares-burni...