Unfortunately no. A) too many old growth trees would be required, and b) trees don't remove carbon from the entire carbon cycle, just temporarily sequester it. You need to grow turn carbon into something that won't decompose, or prevent things that do decompose from doing so.I know I’m being flippant, but can’t we just plant new trees/vegetation when permafrost melts and offset the greenhouse gases? Trump: “Do that and sweep the floors to prevent wildfires. Problem solved!”
Unfortunately no. A) too many old growth trees would be required, and b) trees don't remove carbon from the entire carbon cycle, just temporarily sequester it. You need to grow turn carbon into something that won't decompose, or prevent things that do decompose from doing so.
Imagine burying billions of tons of wood pellets in old coal mines and you're on the right track.
Oil, maybe. Interestingly coal/large scale crystallized carbon might be one of the most rare resources in the universe. It only exists on earth due to an obscure half billion year war between fungi and trees (the trees won).Bonus: In a gajillion years, we'll have more of that sweet sweet crude oil to burn!
Oil, maybe. Interestingly coal/large scale crystallized carbon might be one of the most rare resources in the universe. It only exists on earth due to an obscure half billion year war between fungi and trees (the trees won).
Thats one of the things my adult ass learned about some years ago, origins of coal and why there'll be no more of it... Yay internet, with AI all that knowledge is at the fingertips of everyone... Why the fuck are we fucking this information thing up so badly when it could be so good??????
Oil, maybe. Interestingly coal/large scale crystallized carbon might be one of the most rare resources in the universe. It only exists on earth due to an obscure half billion year war between fungi and trees (the trees won).
You are not?I'm confused. I thought coal formed because of a lack of fungus breaking down fallen trees. Massive peat swamps formed everywhere. Once the fungus developed, trees broke down and no more coal?
Where am I wrong?
Close, coal comes from fallen trees being compressed under dirt/tectonic plates for hundreds of millions of years. Peat bogs were required for this I think, though there were probably regions where trees got buried without it.I'm confused. I thought coal formed because of a lack of fungus breaking down fallen trees. Massive peat swamps formed everywhere. Once the fungus developed, trees broke down and no more coal?
Where am I wrong?
I wonder if those economic predictions/extrapolations is considering the incoming climate apocalypse? Do they have their supply demand equations properly balanced? Cause I dont think they do...Poor Greenland. Even the intro paragraph on the wiki page for Greenland mentions the great powers interest in mining their land as fast as it comes out from under the ice.
There was a show on Discovery a few years ago that has already looked for riches under the retreating ice in Greenland. There was a place where rubies were just lying all over the surface. Grift sniffer Trump apparently knows.I wonder if those economic predictions/extrapolations is considering the incoming climate apocalypse? Do they have their supply demand equations properly balanced? Cause I dont think they do...
We appear to have already reached 1.5c.So. Making plans to move to Greenland.
Sooooooo fucked.
I love how there's an inference that anyone will give a shit about rubies at that point.There was a show on Discovery a few years ago that has already looked for riches under the retreating ice in Greenland. There was a place where rubies were just lying all over the surface. Grift sniffer Trump apparently knows.
It's like you can't eat gold.I love how there's an inference that anyone will give a shit about rubies at that point.
The fuck are you going to do with them? Stuff a bunch in a sock and brain your neighbor?
We have them. Grow switchgrass, dip it in tar sands by the pallet load, stuff it in the bottom of a coal mine. Repeat a couple trillion times.Think the planet needs to redirect all science and research expenditures towards stem and mechanisms for sucking greenhouse gasses out of the atmosphere.
It also grows phenomenally fast. It's not quite as good as seaweed for converting atmospheric (well, hydrospheric i guess) co2 into physical form but it's really good. Grow it, till it, compress it into bricks and bake the moisture out, seal it, bury it. Do about 1.5T tons of it and we'll be looking a lot better.
Is this thing already in motion? The economics, the land etc? Seems like it's something that should already be rolling...It also grows phenomenally fast. It's not quite as good as seaweed for converting atmospheric (well, hydrospheric i guess) co2 into physical form but it's really good. Grow it, till it, compress it into bricks and bake the moisture out, seal it, bury it. Do about 1.5T tons of it and we'll be looking a lot better.
Not as far as I know. It's an extraordinary amount of work. We're not big on doing extraordinary amounts of work. We'd rather suffer the consequences.Is this thing already in motion? The economics, the land etc? Seems like it's something that should already be rolling...
edit: ran into this while diving... 1M ton per facility is not nothing either.
![]()
Carbon capture draws millions in lobbying, billions in federal subsidies - OpenSecrets News
Companies, investors and public policy groups are lobbying the U.S. government to invest in direct air capture.www.opensecrets.org