• baldingpudenda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 day ago

    Sometimes it feels like we are going to find solutions to every modern problem except taking the carbon out of the air.

    • Karjalan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      And then we’ll discover that some of those solutions created some new secret, worse, problem we now have to solve

    • storm_shadow@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 day ago

      We have solutions to carbon, it’s just that the people who have the power to utilize those solutions refuse to do it so they can get a bigger number in their bank account.

      • dusk@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        …and the people keep living unsustainably, bankrolling dodgy corporations, and voting for dodgy politicians, while not taking any responsibility

      • matlag@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Unfortunately, in many places now, new planted trees don’t survive the multiple disasters coming one after the other: drought, fire, flood, rinse and repeat.

        This is is still better than nothing where they can survive, but we passed the point where we can save ourselves by planting trees.

        Number one priority should be on stopping burning fossil. We’re getting nowhere close to that. Most countries give themselves pats on the back for adding enough renewable to reduce the % of fossil fuel energy, without actually reducing the absolute number.

      • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        and other plants

        So what you’re saying is, we need to replace all life in the oceans with invasive toxic GMO algae?

      • tiedigger@fedinsfw.app
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        That will not work. Because Forrests only store CO2 but won’t remove it, you have to add more forest areas. Currently the store around 900 gigatons of CO2 and occupy 30% of the land mass. We produce about 33gigatons of CO2 each year (this is just a emission btw the real number through land change etc is higher) which means we would need to plant trees on 1% of earth each year, which is not sustainable for more than 50 years.

        • Nouvellalia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          It will work. You just ignored the second part, “and not burn stuff”. We need to stop producing, and reforest everything that can be.

          • zergtoshi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            23 hours ago

            That!
            Plant trees and other plants that capture carbon and can be turned into charcoal.
            Bury the charcoal and remove the carbon from the cycle for a long time.
            Rinse and repeat.

          • tiedigger@fedinsfw.app
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            23 hours ago

            It will not work because it doesn’t matter if you burn it or not. If you don’t burn it, the CO2 will be released regardless because the wood will decompost in 10-50 years.

            • Nouvellalia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              21 hours ago

              No babes, you don’t burn the oil. Yes, dead trees decompose, but that turns into new trees. Increasing the forest lowers the carbon in the atmosphere, full stop.

              • tiedigger@fedinsfw.app
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                12 hours ago

                Which gets us back to my argument that you have to increase the used landmass for forests by 1% per year yeah which means after 50 years the earth is full of forests, which is unsustainable. You are nearly there

          • tiedigger@fedinsfw.app
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Yeah it is stored in the living tree the moment the tree dies it will be released back into the atmosphere by decomposing.

            Further I already use niced up numbers in favour of trees there because I use forests not trees and forests save half their carbon in the soil

            Removing would be that it is removed out of the carbon cycle but that isn’t happening here the carbon cycle storage is just higher.