To prevent possibly catastrophic climate change we can't just bring C02 emissions to zero - we have to go negative, sucking the CO2 that's already there. The best tech is a billion years old: trees. Massive Reforestation could Slow Global Warming.https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/massive-forest-restoration-could-greatly-slow-global-warming/ …
Interesting - 205 GT is about 6 years of annual CO2 production. So a useful contribution, but only a small part of what's needed over the long run.
-
-
It does represent about 20ppm. In absence of silver bullets, might be a useful tool while we work out how to decarbonise elsewhere.
-
I wonder how much extra efficiency synthetic biology might achieve here. The basic cost-benefit already seems pretty good: 6 years CO2 (or 20ppm) for $300 billion is very inexpensive compared to (say) the EPA's estimate for the cost of the Clean Air Act in the US.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
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.