Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre • Hacker News Board

Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre

#131

Post by VBprogrammer » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:21 PM UTC

RosanaAnaDana wrote: post #104

RaptorJ wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well, if you convert it all to biochar (say with a 50% volume fudge factor to account for non-carbon components and packing density), you just have to stack an area the size of pennsylvania with 1 meter of biochar each year to zero emissions.

And the carbon cost of the energy it takes to convert it all to biochar?

The energy and carbon come from burning off the volatile organics from the wood. It impacts the amount of carbon sequestered but it's still a net positive.

Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre

#132

Post by StavrosK » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:24 PM UTC

namirez wrote: post #126

This can be helpful, but it's still a shortsighted solution. There are two types of carbon cycle on the planet: the short-term and the long-term [1]. The only natural mechanisms to transfer carbon between the two cycles are the planet's tectonic and volcanic activities. This has changed in recent history and we are constantly extracting carbon buried underground (long cycle) and release it into the atmosphere (short…

I mean, it sounds like the real real solution is to bury trees deep inside the earth.

Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre

#133

Post by cookingrobot » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:26 PM UTC

A unique carbon capture solution I don't hear much about is kelp. The key is that you want the carbon captured to stay out of the air, and the deep sea is a great place for it to end up. https://carboninstitute.org/kelp-and-carbon-sequestration-br...

Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre

#134

Post by JusticeJuice » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:28 PM UTC

Timothycquinn wrote: post #128

There are very limited cases where growing trees for carbon sequestration purposes is a net benefit for the planet. Yes, there are places where land is un-utilised, and water is sufficient but it's often better for the environment to allow wild plants grow so wildlife can flourish. Here is a very good article by the respected Bob McDonald speaks to this topic: https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/trees-carbon-emissions…

> There are very limited cases where growing trees for carbon sequestration purposes is a net benefit for the planet.

Could you elaborate on this? I couldn't see anything in that article to back up that statement.

Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre

#135

Post by namirez » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:29 PM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #132

namirez wrote: post #126

This can be helpful, but it's still a shortsighted solution. There are two types of carbon cycle on the planet: the short-term and the long-term [1]. The only natural mechanisms to transfer carbon between the two cycles are the planet's tectonic and volcanic activities. This has changed in recent history and we are constantly extracting carbon buried underground (long cycle) and release it into the atmosphere (short…

I mean, it sounds like the real real solution is to bury trees deep inside the earth.

Agreed! Eventually, some form of carbon sequestration is necessary.

Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre

#136

Post by BasicObject » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:37 PM UTC

cookingrobot wrote: post #133

A unique carbon capture solution I don't hear much about is kelp. The key is that you want the carbon captured to stay out of the air, and the deep sea is a great place for it to end up. https://carboninstitute.org/kelp-and-carbon-sequestration-br...

Is there something similar in freshwater? A carbon capturing plant like kelp in lakes?

Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre

#137

Post by zubspace » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:39 PM UTC

namirez wrote: post #126

This can be helpful, but it's still a shortsighted solution. There are two types of carbon cycle on the planet: the short-term and the long-term [1]. The only natural mechanisms to transfer carbon between the two cycles are the planet's tectonic and volcanic activities. This has changed in recent history and we are constantly extracting carbon buried underground (long cycle) and release it into the atmosphere (short…

Would be interesting to know what you think of project Vesta [1]. Their approach involves weathering olivine on beaches to speed up the long-term carbon cycle.

[1] https://projectvesta.org/

Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre

#138

Post by coderintherye » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:40 PM UTC

jaclaz wrote: post #68

coderintherye wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

World Tree is solid. I've talked with the owner and she has a good program set up with the farmers who grow the trees to get the capital they need to plant them and then revenue share from the sales. They raised money (about $1 million) on WeFunder earlier this year to help grow the program.

Good, so you can maybe know (and tell us) what is manufactured from the actual timber (i.e. to whom it is sold and for what use).

You can see here who they plan to market the lumber to: https://worldtree.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/World-Tree...

Note that they are not harvesting until 2022 according to the plan, so it remains to be seen if they can effectively execute on their sales strategy.

Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre

#139

Post by specialist » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:43 PM UTC

namirez wrote: post #126

This can be helpful, but it's still a shortsighted solution. There are two types of carbon cycle on the planet: the short-term and the long-term [1]. The only natural mechanisms to transfer carbon between the two cycles are the planet's tectonic and volcanic activities. This has changed in recent history and we are constantly extracting carbon buried underground (long cycle) and release it into the atmosphere (short…

Can we just drop these trees (organic matter) into subduction zones?

I've assumed carbon capture would be implemented by burying it. Maybe even pump it back underground, to also help counteract subsidence. Or really far-fetched is making misc kinds of bricks.

Re: Empress trees absorb about 103 tons of carbon a year per acre

#140

Post by avip » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 8:45 PM UTC

zubspace wrote: post #137

namirez wrote: post #126

This can be helpful, but it's still a shortsighted solution. There are two types of carbon cycle on the planet: the short-term and the long-term [1]. The only natural mechanisms to transfer carbon between the two cycles are the planet's tectonic and volcanic activities. This has changed in recent history and we are constantly extracting carbon buried underground (long cycle) and release it into the atmosphere (short…

Would be interesting to know what you think of project Vesta [1]. Their approach involves weathering olivine on beaches to speed up the long-term carbon cycle. [1] https://projectvesta.org/

I would be interested in knowing who is coordinating the Vesta spam attack, and why. EW could hardly be called "a technology" as of today. http://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/2018/05/enhanced-weathe...