4 ms·
It's the only way to lower CO2 levels though, right? Not emitting doesn't get you that.
by wilg 3y ago
It's the only way to lower CO2 levels though, right? Not emitting doesn't get you that.
- kwk1 3y agoDirect air capture is not the only way to lower CO2 levels, although you are right that point capture of emissions doesn't lower levels by itself. An example of another technique for CO2 reduction is enhanced olivine weathering, or bioenergy + capture. These are called negative emission technologies in general.
- uoaei 3y agoTrees are net-negative by larger margins than any other technology we have invented, pretty much any way you want to quantify it (efficiency per kilogram of tree/tech, efficiency per dollar of tree/tech, etc.).
- wilg 3y agoI would imagine there's an upper limit to how many trees could be planted, and they might use more space. That won't really work if carbon emissions are an ongoing concern. But by all means let's do as much as we can. https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2927/examining-the-viability-of-planting-trees-to-help-mitigate-climate-change/ https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2927/examining-the-viability-o...
- wkat4242 3y agoYes but for now we're still emitting so much that we're effectively only reducing emissions. There's no real point until there are no more emissions to cut which is much easier and energy-efficient to do than capturing.
- wilg 3y agoThe point would be to get the technology working really well.