4 ms·

That's only partially true. You can cut forests down before they burn and finish the product into something that won't just be burnt. Then people can store the

• echelon 4y ago
  Would it be practical to grow entire farms of trees (or something fast growing - bamboo, kudzu, certain crops), harvest them, and bury the results? Repeat over and over at scale to sequester carbon. You'd need mineral inputs, of course, but maybe you can recoup these.
  • MAGZine 4y ago
    That's a good question. I suspect it matters on the composition of the wood. Wood that locks in a lot of moisture instead of carbon might be counter-intuitive. I don't really know what I'm talking about here, I'm just thinking aloud. There's probably some woods better than others, though that's not a very interesting statement by itself.
  • MrVandemar 4y ago
    Not really. A big part of the issue is fossil fuels. These are essentially vast amounts of carbon from millions of years ago that we are digging up and pumping into the atmosphere. Burying trees is not the answer, not digging up the old ones and not burning them would help a lot. Also, bury trees and you bury the nutrients they use to grow, locking them away from the next generation of trees and plants. To plant, grow, cut down and bury trees on any scale you also require machines ... that run on fossil fuels.