I did the back of the napkin math below: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42697255 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42697255 Barring mistakes, it balan

I did the back of the napkin math below: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42697255 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42697255 Barring mistakes, it balances if we had avoided reducing the planet's vegetation by 20% since 1900. So much for that. That's obviously not "the" solution, but it seems like reducing fuel burn while increasing forestation would benefit us beyond what is commonly expected.