2 ms·
Yeah, we need to go extremely carbon-negative, not merely carbon-neutral. It's so easy to forget this.
by dataflow 5y ago
Yeah, we need to go extremely carbon-negative, not merely carbon-neutral. It's so easy to forget this.
- elzbardico 5y agoWhy?
- dataflow 5y agoWhy do we need to go carbon-negative? Because the atmosphere already has too much CO2, and reducing net emissions to 0 means that CO2 will stay there. We've emitted that CO2 in the course of (say) 300 years but need to pull it down in (say) < 50 years, hence we need to pull it down much faster than we emitted it. Not sure if that answered your question or if you meant something else.
- czbond 5y agoThanks - that did help me.
- elzbardico 5y agoYes, but what I wanted to know is if we kept the current concentrations would temeperature keep rising or would it stay basically the same as it is today.
- ummonk 5y agoIt would stay the same. And nature would reduce current concentrations back to normal over the next few centuries.