2 ms·
We can increase them, it's just really hard to decrease them which is why scientists have been telling us to stop increasing the CO2 levels for about a century.
by sfn42 2mo ago
We can increase them, it's just really hard to decrease them which is why scientists have been telling us to stop increasing the CO2 levels for about a century.
- srean 2mo agoIndeed. Cutting down on annual emissions will not be accompanied by reduction in atmospheric CO2, unless the current rate of emission is lower than that of natural processes that take CO2 out of the atmosphere. That's why atmospheric CO2 continues to rise, despite cuts, if the cuts at global scale are at all real.
- wafflemaker 2mo agoIt's not hard, it just takes a lot of energy. Enough cheap energy (that doesn't produce CO2) and some incentive and you could have CO2 slowly removed. Like in Critical Mass by Daniel Suarez.
- ghosty141 2mo agoTrees are that and they don't even need human intervention.
- lovich 2mo agoThere’s some projects trying to figure out carbon capture that’s net negative for co2 emissions like Vesta[1], but yea, we haven’t done nearly enough. [1] https://www.vesta.earth/science#Duck-Pilot https://www.vesta.earth/science#Duck-Pilot
- sfn42 2mo agoIt does not just take a lot of energy. If we got unlimited free energy today it would take decades if not centuries to build enough carbon capture facilities to just remove as much CO2 as we're producing. Of course the free energy would instantly allow us to eliminate a huge amount of emissions but that's not really relevant to the point. All the concrete for the tens of thousands of facilities would add up a good amount of additional CO2 to scrub as well.