Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Mflms t1_j5v8hwb wrote

Reply to comment by MatrioticMuckraker in Researchers unveil the least costly carbon capture system to date - down to $39 per metric ton. by PNNL

Definitely faster, depending on location planting and worse yet, replanting can take up to 20 years to be carbon negative.

79

lilrabbitfoofoo t1_j5v9ws4 wrote

Actually it's closer to a century for a forest. :(

But, yes, let's do both...and throw in a whole lot of algae farms to boot!

73

Yotsubato t1_j5wo773 wrote

And monoculture forests are really crappy for biodiversity and the ecology of the area

12

RaffiaWorkBase t1_j5vg6ht wrote

I thought the trees took care of replanting?

7

Kioskwar t1_j5vryme wrote

Not since the entwives left

82

Nimoy2313 t1_j601qcq wrote

The poor entwives. Makes me sad thinking about it.

2

Kioskwar t1_j604r4l wrote

I like to think this theory is true:

https://www.reddit.com/r/FanTheories/comments/20ojbk/hobbits_are_entwives/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

1

Nimoy2313 t1_j61kdwy wrote

Interesting. I always thought having them all be dead was a mistake. The elves at least the Silvan or Sindar would have been close friends and allies and maybe even live alongside each other. They would have had a safe place in elven kingdoms.

My theory based on lore is that when they moved east, they moved too close to Mordor. Which was a deadly mistake. If Mordor didn't finish them off then the people (forgot the name, something riders?) who attacked Rohan from the Sea of Ruhn area finished them off on the way to attack the men.

1

Mflms t1_j5vh2r9 wrote

I mean replanting in the sense trees are cleared and replanted like in forestry. Or tree are cleared and substitute trees are planted elsewhere.

3

danielravennest t1_j5vv6rz wrote

Clearcutting is not good forestry practice. You want to do selective cutting, so enough trees remain to hold the soil in place and allow natural regeneration from the remaining trees. You can plant some new seedlings if you want to alter the species mix.

Then you need to turn the harvested trees into durable wood products, not cheap particleboard crap that end up in a landfill in a few years. You want to store the carbon.

Depending on the soil types and species, you may need to fertilize to maintain forest production. Removing harvested logs removes nutrients.

Source: used to own a tree farm.

23

Mflms t1_j5wue45 wrote

>Clearcutting is not good forestry practice. You want to do selective cutting, so enough trees remain to hold the soil in place and allow natural regeneration from the remaining trees. You can plant some new seedlings if you want to alter the species mix.

Agreed, you should tell the Brazilians.

8

Nearatree t1_j5xnz6o wrote

Tell them what exactly? The rain forest is getting cut down to make room for soy feed for cattle, not because people desperately need wood.

2

danielravennest t1_j5zndge wrote

Alas, I live in the US state of Georgia, so they won't listen. The most I can do is inform them of a fugitive working in the US Capitol under an assumed name.

1

stappertheborder t1_j5xqe3j wrote

Tell this to the current foresters please. I studied forestry and couldn't agree more.

2

danielravennest t1_j5zo6ce wrote

Which foresters? There are ten million private forest owners in the US, not to mention government land. The best I can do is get together with some local people and protect a part of it.

1

Fhotaku t1_j5xyxqp wrote

Is the cheap particle board, thrown into a landfill and buried, not "stored carbon"?

1

danielravennest t1_j5zp0o4 wrote

Organic material buried in a landfill tends to decompose. Dry wood, like the frame of a house, can last a long time. But bury it with household trash like food scraps and there is enough water to cause it to break down.

2

WilsonPB t1_j5xzf7q wrote

What about methane release? More harmful than CO2.

1

sgent t1_j5zmdpc wrote

More harmful in the short term, and at least some landfills have methane capture which is either sold or used for local power.

1

FrostyYouCunt t1_j5xihc5 wrote

You can also pump it underground beneath basalt layers and it binds to the basalt as it percolates upwards, forming carbonate rocks.

1

HoosierDev t1_j5yox0c wrote

The issue with things like that is they can trigger earth quakes. Pressurized waste water injection wells from fracking water disposals created a series of earthquakes in Oklahoma. Putting new or changing pressures at scale on rocks is going to be a problem

1

FrostyYouCunt t1_j61muij wrote

It’s already being done.

I’m not an expert, but I think you’re talking out your ass.

Hydraulic fracturing is different from pumping gas into the ground because liquids are incompressible. Gasses are extremely compressible.

0