4 ms·

If we take the climate agenda at face value and genuinely want to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, I'm not sure the same radical conservationist them

If we take the climate agenda at face value and genuinely want to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, I'm not sure the same radical conservationist themes make sense. Especially if we accept that this is a world ending emergency. Forests should be managed for the maximum yield of lumber instead. Reforestation, yes. However these forests must be used to capture carbon in the form of finished wood products. Allowing these trees to rot and decay releases the carbon back into the atmosphere. Similarly, there are periods of peak growth, as compared to old growth which may not develop at the same rate. Also consider the constant production of debris such as fallen leaves created by older trees, relative to the faster growth of younger trees. Once again the stated goals do not meet with the proposed actions. At what point is it reasonable to inquire about ulterior motives and examine the political economy of the proposed solutions?

tuatoru 5y ago
Wild deciduous forests leave (hah!) a lot of carbon in the soil that is created. The soils that Europe has strip-mined of carbon were built up in a relatively short period after the last ice age. IIRC the rate of soil build-up in some places was about a foot per century. > Once again the stated goals do not meet with the proposed actions. Yes, photosynthesis is far too slow to be useful at the required scale and in the required timeframe. Accelerated weathering of olivine[1] could work and be cheap enough. Rock weathering is how carbon dioxide is actually removed from the atmosphere over the long term. Accelerated weathering works by increasing surface area of the rock and temperature to increase chemical reaction rates. > ulterior motives I don't think that this is nearly as big a problem as the sheer innumeracy of the political class, and their refusal to look at the problem squarely. 1. https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/pc0reb/an_attempted_primer_on_olivine_weathering_as/ https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/pc0reb/an_a...

tuatoru 5y ago

Wild deciduous forests leave (hah!) a lot of carbon in the soil that is created. The soils that Europe has strip-mined of carbon were built up in a relatively short period after the last ice age. IIRC the rate of soil build-up in some places was about a foot per century. > Once again the stated goals do not meet with the proposed actions. Yes, photosynthesis is far too slow to be useful at the required scale and in the required timeframe. Accelerated weathering of olivine[1] could work and be cheap enough. Rock weathering is how carbon dioxide is actually removed from the atmosphere over the long term. Accelerated weathering works by increasing surface area of the rock and temperature to increase chemical reaction rates. > ulterior motives I don't think that this is nearly as big a problem as the sheer innumeracy of the political class, and their refusal to look at the problem squarely. 1. https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/pc0reb/an_attempted_primer_on_olivine_weathering_as/ https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/pc0reb/an_a...