Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

e360.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 332 posts

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#201

Post by dang »

noja wrote: post #181
Radim wrote: post #169

CO₂ is a precious and much coveted resource in nature. It's predicted to become all sequestered under ground eventually, on a billion-year timescale (making it quite troublesome for life!). More pressingly, when it comes to plant life RIGHT NOW, we're still dangerously close to CO₂ starvation levels. The current ~400 parts-per-million are a good deal healthier than the ~180 ppm we've had throughout Quaternary (which…

CO2 drought? Starvation levels? What's your point? We need more CO2 because... what? Edit: I can't help but think your comment was sponsored.

Insinuations of astroturfing are not allowed here. Please read the site guidelines and don't post like this to HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

If anyone wants more explanation of why we have this rule, I've written plenty at https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme....

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#202

Post by harryh »

ph0rque wrote: post #200
harryh wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your quoted price for CO2 offsets is about $1/ton (us residents emit a bit more than 15 tons of CO2 per year). That's about 150x smaller than most other estimates for the cost of carbon sequestration. I think your math is probably wrong.

Here's my source: https://trees.org/faqs/ (see the answer to question #15). I think the more important question is, can they scale that cost per tree planted? Hard to say until it's tried. Also, my calculations assume 22 tons emitted by the average US resident.

Another way to know your number is wrong is to consider the fact that the US emits ~5.5 gigatons of CO2 per year. If it cost only $1 a ton to sequester that then the total cost would only be only 5.5 billion dollars a year.

That's....not very much at all. Global warming wouldn't be a problem if Jeff Bezos could fix it by himself.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#203

Post by hamandcheese »

nichos wrote: post #151
Kiro wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do you live where shade trees are a thing?

Here in North Florida, shade trees are very desirable when buying a home. Water and live oaks, magnolia and pines are very common here.

In Florida they are also very risky because they tend to destroy homes when they topple during a hurricane.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#204

Post by ph0rque »

harryh wrote: post #202
ph0rque wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's my source: https://trees.org/faqs/ (see the answer to question #15). I think the more important question is, can they scale that cost per tree planted? Hard to say until it's tried. Also, my calculations assume 22 tons emitted by the average US resident.

Another way to know your number is wrong is to consider the fact that the US emits ~5.5 gigatons of CO2 per year. If it cost only $1 a ton to sequester that then the total cost would only be only 5.5 billion dollars a year. That's....not very much at all. Global warming wouldn't be a problem if Jeff Bezos could fix it by himself.

Feel free to point out where my math is wrong, or what any of the numbers should be. I show my math work in the blog article I linked to. I would be happy to make any corrections.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#205

Post by timClicks »

duxup wrote: post #188
Panino wrote: post #46

A good way to take part in increasing the number of trees, if you own your own home, is to improve the state of your shade trees. The trees absorb atmospheric carbon while also reducing home temperatures in summer, which in turn reduces the electricity people use for cooling. (And you save money!!) So a shade tree is a particularly effective way to reduce both atmospheric CO2 and electric bills. You might think of sh…

I'm fortunate enough to have a pond and some marshy area bordering my house. My neighbors sometimes wondered why I don't trim it up and make it look "nice" right up to the water like some folks do. I like it wild, lots of trees and wildlife. I even let the wildness take a bit more of the yard than when i moved in. A few big trees quickly sprung up, no maintenance (compared to a yard) it looks great wild. Perhaps if o…

The invertebrates that occupy that pond and its surrounds really appreciate that you're leaving it that condition.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#206

Post by _ph_ »

Radim wrote: post #169

CO₂ is a precious and much coveted resource in nature. It's predicted to become all sequestered under ground eventually, on a billion-year timescale (making it quite troublesome for life!). More pressingly, when it comes to plant life RIGHT NOW, we're still dangerously close to CO₂ starvation levels. The current ~400 parts-per-million are a good deal healthier than the ~180 ppm we've had throughout Quaternary (which…

The current vegetation is adapted well to the CO2 levels before industrialisation, that is about 300ppm CO2. The change in CO2-content is actually detrimental to some plants. Furthermore, the quick temperature change is going to wipe out large eco systems. The question isn't, what is the optimal CO2 concentration for single species, but about the health of the eco systems we are living in. We are about to wipe out large eco systems and as a consequence, the environment we are living in.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#207

Post by duxup »

timClicks wrote: post #205
duxup wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm fortunate enough to have a pond and some marshy area bordering my house. My neighbors sometimes wondered why I don't trim it up and make it look "nice" right up to the water like some folks do. I like it wild, lots of trees and wildlife. I even let the wildness take a bit more of the yard than when i moved in. A few big trees quickly sprung up, no maintenance (compared to a yard) it looks great wild. Perhaps if o…

The invertebrates that occupy that pond and its surrounds really appreciate that you're leaving it that condition.

The enormous snapping turtle that visits has chosen not to eat my children, I like that.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#208

Post by CydeWeys »

zitterbewegung wrote: post #135
CydeWeys wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trees don't really continuously "consume" CO2 in this manner. The only CO2 removed by a tree is the carbon that ends up permanently Incorporated in the wood itself. And if you burn that wood, it's all released back into the air. Even if it just dies and decays, some of it ends up being released.

Yea, so to sequester the carbon either build something out of it or dump it into the ocean. Maybe build a boat?

Rather than sequestering all this carbon into wood and then trying to figure out what to do with the wood so that it doesn't decompose over time and release the CO2 back into the air, it'd make more sense to stop digging up lots of carbon from underground (where it's been stable for hundreds of millions of years in the form of coal and oil) and burning it to release the CO2 into the air.

We already have amazing reserves of CO2, and we're digging them up and releasing them by burning them! Trees are just a tiny band-aid on top of this massive harm we're self-inflicting.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#209

Post by bpfrh »

jhrmnn wrote: post #147
gameswithgo wrote: post #133

Until those trees die, then its all back again. Trees are just a buffer, and how much co2 would be produced mobilizing the planet to plant 1.2 trillion trees?

Not necessarily. As other posters in this discussion point out, you can for instance create biochar from trees, which can be permanently planted in the ground, thus finally returning in the place of origin the carbon we earlier dug out in the form of oil and natural gas.

but biochar requieres high temperatures, which usually produces co2... The problem with all this CO2 Storage is that we have a perfect storage for co2: Oil. Since we burn this storage, we release more and more of that CO2 without anyway to put it back to storage. The tree idea can maybe slow down the climate change, but it is in no way a solution, merely a short stopgap.

Re: Planting 1.2T Trees Could Cancel Out a Decade of CO2 Emissions

#210

Post by foolfoolz »

aj7 wrote: post #186

If the US share is 10%, that amounts to planting 40,000 trees per square mile over 3 million square miles. That is a square grid of trees, every 26 feet in X and Y, over 80% of the US landmass. Say what?

and just because the trees are in the ground everyone magically has enough water to care for them
Post reply on HN