3 ms·

other hot take: soil restoration, reforesting and ocean deacidification. We need to reduce carbon emission, but also restore natural carbon sequestration proces

other hot take: soil restoration, reforesting and ocean deacidification. We need to reduce carbon emission, but also restore natural carbon sequestration processes in a way that supports ecology.

toomuchtodo 5y ago
Have to start sucking the CO2 we've already overloaded the atmosphere and oceans with if those efforts are to provide meaningful value. Otherwise, you're dressing wounds on a the victim who is bleeding out from an artery.
- beaconstudios 5y ago
  nature itself sucks CO2 out of the atmosphere, primarily through soil, plants and the ocean. The ocean is a CO2 buffer (ie, just stores CO2 rather than consuming it) but soil and plants actively consume CO2. I do agree that we also need some kind of technological carbon sequestration. I'm skeptical of the "pump it underground" approach and think that things like CO2-negative building materials and processes would be a way to couple CO2 extraction and economic incentive.
  - toomuchtodo 5y ago
    Lots to unpack here. First, consider the delta in PPM between present day and pre-industrialization [1]. Next, consider that the ocean has acted as a carbon sink [2] (you mention this), but to great detriment to its chemical composition (more CO2 = increased acidity). We should absolutely not rely on it further as a carbon sink if we expect to use the ocean for aquaculture and to sustain life. Finally, soil, plants, and trees are in no way able to absorb CO2 at the rate necessary to mitigate climate change. This leaves air source extraction as a critical need. I'm partial to Climeworks [3], but any technology that can sequester CO2 underground in a stable form will do. [1] https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/... [2] https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/srccs_chapter6-1.pdf https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/srccs_chapte... [3] https://climeworks.com/ https://climeworks.com/
    - beaconstudios 5y ago
      I specifically wrote that we need further work on ocean deacification, because of all those things you've mentioned. It's not an either/or proposition: we need to do all of these things: - restore the ecosystem's ability to consume CO2 - decrease our production of CO2 - develop technology to artificially sequester and consume CO2 Alongside other, non-CO2 related things like restoring biodiversity and ecosystems (where possible, mass extinction is still a thing), reducing our chemical output and destruction of nature etc.

other hot take: soil restoration, reforesting and ocean deacidification. We need to reduce carbon emission, but also restore natural carbon sequestration processes in a way that supports ecology.

toomuchtodo 5y ago

Have to start sucking the CO2 we've already overloaded the atmosphere and oceans with if those efforts are to provide meaningful value. Otherwise, you're dressing wounds on a the victim who is bleeding out from an artery.

beaconstudios 5y ago
nature itself sucks CO2 out of the atmosphere, primarily through soil, plants and the ocean. The ocean is a CO2 buffer (ie, just stores CO2 rather than consuming it) but soil and plants actively consume CO2. I do agree that we also need some kind of technological carbon sequestration. I'm skeptical of the "pump it underground" approach and think that things like CO2-negative building materials and processes would be a way to couple CO2 extraction and economic incentive.
- toomuchtodo 5y ago
  Lots to unpack here. First, consider the delta in PPM between present day and pre-industrialization [1]. Next, consider that the ocean has acted as a carbon sink [2] (you mention this), but to great detriment to its chemical composition (more CO2 = increased acidity). We should absolutely not rely on it further as a carbon sink if we expect to use the ocean for aquaculture and to sustain life. Finally, soil, plants, and trees are in no way able to absorb CO2 at the rate necessary to mitigate climate change. This leaves air source extraction as a critical need. I'm partial to Climeworks [3], but any technology that can sequester CO2 underground in a stable form will do. [1] https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/... [2] https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/srccs_chapter6-1.pdf https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/srccs_chapte... [3] https://climeworks.com/ https://climeworks.com/
  - beaconstudios 5y ago
    I specifically wrote that we need further work on ocean deacification, because of all those things you've mentioned. It's not an either/or proposition: we need to do all of these things: - restore the ecosystem's ability to consume CO2 - decrease our production of CO2 - develop technology to artificially sequester and consume CO2 Alongside other, non-CO2 related things like restoring biodiversity and ecosystems (where possible, mass extinction is still a thing), reducing our chemical output and destruction of nature etc.