3 ms·
offtopic: Regarding the argument that we shouldn't plant trees because they'll release carbon again: Sure, but we'd get 50 to 100 years or more of massive carb
by bloopernova 3y ago
offtopic: Regarding the argument that we shouldn't plant trees because they'll release carbon again:
Sure, but we'd get 50 to 100 years or more of massive carbon capture, during which we can figure out how to get out of this mess we're in.
further offtopic: Eventually, the disasters will get bad enough that the pressure from people demanding action will outweigh the pressure from lobbying money. But the changes lag the emissions, possibly by a few decades. So by the time action is taken, things will be guaranteed to get worse for 20+ years!
Unfortunately, because of this I believe we're utterly fucked. Words like "doom", "extinction", and "hellscape of suffering" spring to mind. Billions of human lives are going to be lost, and I'm not sure there will be any survivors. Maybe there will be a few scattered tribes of hunter-gatherers?
I hope the biosphere can recover.
- lm28469 3y ago> we shouldn't plant trees because they'll release carbon again: > but we'd get 50 to 100 years or more If you select the right types and don't burn them you get 300+ years. If you reuse the wood for furnitures and construction you get much more