3 ms·
Fair enough, so instead more CO2 will be captured in more plants and more animals - and more infrastructure if we use wood or capture it in concrete, etc.
by loceng 3y ago
Fair enough, so instead more CO2 will be captured in more plants and more animals - and more infrastructure if we use wood or capture it in concrete, etc.
- __MatrixMan__ 3y agoHow much more, and on what schedule? The destabilizing effects of "more CO2" antecedent may interfere when the "therefore more wood" consequence. For instance, here in Colorado we're seeing a lot of our wood turn into CO2 due to an invasive beetle. I can't say for sure if the warming climate is what catalyzed the invasion, but it's plausible. My point is just that it's uncharted territory, which is inherently more dangerous than charted territory. The system will surely find a new equilibrium eventually but there's no guarantee that we're going to like the path it takes.
- loceng 3y agoGreat questions - I wish the side who's wanting to do drastic-widespread and costly changes would also ground their reasons in facts; in contrast, authoritarians-tyrants manufacturing consent to implement policies to control and limit others isn't uncharted territory - and it is what must first be kept at front of mind in all of these conversations.
- __MatrixMan__ 3y agoPerhaps we need our leadership to be a bit more afraid of us so that they we can encourage them to authentically attempt to address these concerns rather than use them as cover for some kind of alternative agenda--which seems to be what you're implying they'll do--but that strikes me as orthogonal to the issue of deciding what steps would be effective in the first place.