Saw this post as I was distracted from reading your book by need for cup of tea:pic.twitter.com/M2wl2haF9N
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Saw this post as I was distracted from reading your book by need for cup of tea:pic.twitter.com/M2wl2haF9N
And yes, the headline is hyperbolic, paper less so:https://www.cell.com/joule/fulltext/S2542-4351(18)30225-3 …
My worry is that this will be used as a pretext to justify inaction on reducing emissions. While this might be a way to offset emissions from things like rocketry and intercontinental air travel, for the majority of applications it will be more efficient to switch to clean energy
Some good discussion of this CO2 reduction theory here: https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/04/18/magazine/dirt-save-earth-carbon-farming-climate-change.html … (“Can Dirt Save the Earth?”, New York Times)
Good Morning Brother, Please convey my request to Bill & Melinda for producing a movie based on high moral values. With God's grace I can write, Act & direct that movie. Wish you & your family a great health and happiness. Please think about to change the World.
Yes, I feel as though we should use both tech and trees.
Even more, it's necessary from about 2040 onwards! (negative emissions required from about then to stay within Paris goal of 2° increase)
If we could only turn clickbait into gasoline we would really have something.
NETs are not only worth it, it's a necessity. Even the more pessimistic scenarios of the IPCC presuppose not only substantial reductions in emissions, but implementation of NETS on a scale that don't seem economically, politically or technologically viable atm.
...so they are not really pessimistic scenarios after all, they are quite optimistic.
Won't this cost trillions of dollars?
Endorsement a little overdue wouldn't you say? How much discussion have you heard about photosynthesis in the public discourse over "climate change". You should also think about reducing methane emission by cows through feed supplements.
Pardon my chemistry, but the article does not explain how the CO2 is split into carbon and oxygen and where the energy comes from to do it - you cannot burn CO2.
I think carbon capture and absorption by trees are worth spending expenditure of large scale. Easy cheap decarbonizing green machine. On large swaths of land in America and elsewhere. Especially in deserts and arid places.
Why hyperbolic? If it is truly scalable at reasonable cost why can't it capture all the CO2 emitted, and more?
Trees certainly, as measures to capture carbon/ prevent desertification. But first we have to stop the destruction of natural habitats!
As a person who works in the tree business, I'm not so sure that they're a reliable long term carbon sink. Growth, death, decay. That's the carbon cycle.
Couldn't agree more
If it works. Just put it up cars' ass.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.