406

Entropy? Never heard of it. (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) by hsr@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

157 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 days ago

If you can find a more efficient, less expensive way to physically sequester carbon from the atmosphere than letting forests grow, I'm sure there's a lot of awards you could win

[-] ThunderclapSasquatch@startrek.website 1 points 4 days ago

Why does it have to be cheaper? Why not both?

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago

Because if it isn't cheaper than simply growing trees, the money would be better spent simply growing trees

[-] ThunderclapSasquatch@startrek.website 1 points 3 days ago

And places trees don't grow?

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 days ago

Try thinking for a second.

Places where trees don't grow are probably not the best places for carbon sequestration if you can't sequester carbon there cheaper or easier than sequestering carbon in trees elsewhere

[-] MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago

You could cause a massive death event in the West/developed nations plus China and India which would slow things a lot though I'd argue killing billions isn't the ideal solution.