32
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 20 points 11 months ago

Tree-planting 🤝 Recycling

Environmentalist actions that have been so over-emphasized past their usefulness that at this point their campaigns have probably been more harmful than helpful in combating climate change.

[-] plinky@hexbear.net 15 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I might be dum dum, but seems like you need to combine cutting down trees with planting them, furniture and houses are carbon sinks for 100 years. Forest sans intervention doesn't actively sink carbon that much, its in balance via forest fires. (Not active deforestation, but combining forest fire fighting with using the damn things)

Although usa does build those weird 6 storied wooden buildings soviet-hmm

[-] BodyBySisyphus@hexbear.net 13 points 11 months ago

In theory you can sink carbon rapidly by converting less carbon-sink-y land to forest and getting a bunch of carbon absorbed into new plants before it eventually reaches a new, lower-atmospheric-C steady state where some carbon is being drawn into long-term carbon sinks like humates and the rest is turning over. But the math on that is really iffy and requires actually establishing a forest rather than putting in a bunch of seedlings that will be mostly dead in 3-5 years.

[-] FloridaBoi@hexbear.net 12 points 11 months ago

Those 4- and 5-over-1s are mostly petroleum

[-] BodyBySisyphus@hexbear.net 10 points 11 months ago

Mass timber is a good option for making them better forms of carbon sequestration but that's going to be a relatively minor contribution to the amount we'd need to draw down to stay in the atmosphere's good graces.

[-] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 8 points 11 months ago

I wonder how much CO2 the world could sink in a few decades if the rest of the developing world went on a Chinese-style construction boom but with mass timber instead of concrete. 🤔

[-] BodyBySisyphus@hexbear.net 8 points 11 months ago

Based on this life cycle assessment, a single 12-story, roughly 8,000 sq meter mass timber building would sequester nearly 2 tons of CO2, and per the Fed (ymmv), China's been producing roughly 50 MM sq m/month, which works out to ~139 kilotons/year.

[-] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 5 points 11 months ago
[-] BodyBySisyphus@hexbear.net 5 points 11 months ago

Whoops, I misread. It's 1.84 kilotons per building, so 154 megatons per year, plus roughly the same in mitigated emissions. Exponents amirite ohnoes

[-] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 4 points 11 months ago

Out of like 30 gigatons annually so still nothing 😭

[-] pudcollar@hexbear.net 11 points 11 months ago
[-] Dolores@hexbear.net 11 points 11 months ago

MAKE UP YOUR MIND THOMAS! soviet-huff

this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2023
32 points (100.0% liked)

Earth

12817 readers
20 users here now

The world’s #1 planet!

A community for the discussion of the environment, climate change, ecology, sustainability, nature, and pictures of cute wild animals.

Socialism is the only path out of the global ecological crisis.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS