Hate to be the “actually…” guy, esp. after your long hiatus, but wood is much too short-term a form of storage for this challenge. We need to get CO2 stuck into *rocks*.
-
-
-
can't it be modelled as a decay of the stock in whatever wooden sequestration mode it's in? Does more than ~1% of the carbon mass of a wooden structure cycled out per annum on avg? Shingles last only 20, telephone poles about 30 but that's got to be on the extreme end of things
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
at 1% decay, if we took all the carbon emitted since the industrial revolution and put it into wooden structures, we'd still be at ~half of the rate of current emissions. I could believe it, but it still would boggle me if 1% of the mass of wooden structures were lost each year
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DanielleFong @patrickc
But what storage rate would you need to get emissions rate zero, then negative, by 2050 or so? And then… where would you grow all that biomass?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chrisnelder @patrickc
i certainly am ignorant of the full difficulty of growing, harvesting, and processing that much wood sustainably (consider effects e.g. degradation of the soil) it's obviously a massive geoengineering project in principle but not an order of magnitude beyond current ag/forestry
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
if we hit net zero emissions at some future date, we'd still want to get atm below where we ended up. to < 400 ppm, probably. the only flows that society currently deals with that are even comparable in magnitude to equal our carbon flows are food, cement, wood, water.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
food doesn't stay us for long; cement is a net emitter (some like e.g. CarbonCure are trying to reduce, which is good), water indeed can absorb carbon and is worth thinking about, and then there's wood which is already a net sink in healthy forests.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
it's worth imagining a future in which we solve our climate crisis in part by building a surplus of wooden structures for everyone. At large scale you could imagine huge efficiencies modular approaches a 'lumber dividend' (ala
@AndrewYang's Freedom dividend) and a right to build1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DanielleFong @chrisnelder and
"make something good with this kit or these 870 two by fours and we'll manage the forests; we'll help fix the planet together. PS: don't burn it"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
it works out to about $2500 CDN/yr worth of eight foot long standard two by fours in lumber around here, consumer pricing Again it's pretty close to other universal income proposals, only here it's like "you are responsible for this wood from the earth, it is yours, use it well"
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.