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

Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 481 posts

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#241

Post by insane_dreamer »

photonthug wrote: post #212
thinkingtoilet wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before anyone jumps into this book I would caution against it. This book had many very cool ideas and moments. The way it played out felt very "real". However, in the end there was very little actual story and was very boring at times. I actively dislike Neal Stephenson but if you want a near-future climate story I would recommend Termination Shock over Ministry For The Future. Just a random internet person's two cen…

Since we’re here.. These are probably everyone’s top 2 eco-punk novels but the rest of an appropriate top 10 list is way more contentious, and imho sources like goodreads or whatever will always have many items that aren’t really even in the genre. So I’ll offer the “metatropolis” anthology, which as a bonus has an audiobook version read by the Star Trek cast. Anyone got anything else?

Thanks! I'm generally not into short fiction, but I'll give this one a go.

One thing I like about The Ministry for the Future, is that it doesn't focus on the "apocalyptic" aspect (i.e., the usual fighting for survival), but rather examines the political and economic aspects.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#242

Post by insane_dreamer »

RayVR wrote: post #230
thinkingtoilet wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before anyone jumps into this book I would caution against it. This book had many very cool ideas and moments. The way it played out felt very "real". However, in the end there was very little actual story and was very boring at times. I actively dislike Neal Stephenson but if you want a near-future climate story I would recommend Termination Shock over Ministry For The Future. Just a random internet person's two cen…

I also read KSR's book. It was interesting at times. However, the research on the financial topics, including the central banks and "global financiers" was quite bad. I don't recall the glaring errors right now, however, given this is an area where I (at least once upon a time) was an expert, it was quite bad to read this and realize there are likely other serious errors in topics with which I am not at all familiar.…

I thought the idea of a "carbon coin" issued by central banks (the primary financial theme of the book) was on fairly solid ground. I'd be interested to know what you found implausible about it.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#244

Post by logicchains »

skrause wrote: post #83
whitehexagon wrote: post #50

Southern Europe seems to be converting farmland into solar farms. And new forests seem to be all monoculture Eucalyptus, fast growing for commercial reasons, but sadly empty of wildlife. As much as I'd love for Europe to be reforested, the reduced food security might come back to bite us.

Food security is not an issue at all. For example in Germany around 20% of all farmland is used for "energy plants" (biogas etc.). Even in Germany solar planels have around a 28 times higher efficiency per area than biogas plants, so there is a lot of potential to repurpose farm land without changing food production at all.

>there is a lot of potential to repurpose farm land without changing food production at all

This takes years, which isn't enough in the case of a major food security event, i.e. war.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#245

Post by geysersam »

roenxi wrote: post #219
rob74 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, what are you proposing? Just do nothing about climate change, as we have done before, and have worse social consequences in the near future rather than now? Denmark is more at risk from rising sea levels than other countries ( https://cphpost.dk/2023-02-17/news/rising-sea-levels-threate... ), so they want to do something about it.

How will converting farmland to forests help with climate change? It seems like it would have no particular impact or make the situation worse w.r.t. climate change for Denmark. If it is a good idea I'd imagine it would also be a good idea if the climate was not changing. Denmark has no ability to impact global CO2 emissions at all. In fact nobody does except ironically the Chinese and their industrial-growth-at-any-…

> how will converting farmland to forest

Farming is very carbon emission intensive if the farmland is reclaimed wetland. Converting the farmland to forest and stopping draining (making it more wet again) can definitely reduce carbon emissions significantly.

> Denmark has no ability to impact global CO2 emissions

This is such a tiresome and logically hollow argument. Denmark has the ability to reduce a fraction of the worlds emissions. The size of the fraction is proportional to the size of their emissions. Every country has a responsibility to reduce it's per capita emissions to sustainable levels. China has lower per capita emissions than most richer countries.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#246

Post by Ma8ee »

manvillej wrote: post #204
mmooss wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Currently the public subsidizes the agriculture industry by paying for the consequences of the industry's carbon emissions. Also, that subsidy distorts industry choices in favor of carbon. The industry might be accustomed to profiting from the subsidy, but that doesn't make them entitled to it! And certainly the industry has had plenty of time to anticipate and adjust to the problems of carbon emissions.

Governments pay to keep food at the cheapest point possible to ensure stability. a fed population doesn't kill their governments. Agriculture is not a regular industry; its a national security issue Farming is not a profitable endeavor. There would be a lot less financial advisors in the world otherwise. A carbon tax will either drive up prices or reduce suppliers, increasing prices. Reducing farmland will require mo…

As you point out, there are several valid reasons to subsidise farming. But then subsidise farming, not carbon emissions! And while you are at it, use those subsidies to encourage farming that is sustainable, both for the climate as well as biodiversity.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#248

Post by OscarCunningham »

Epa095 wrote: post #69
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the least productive 10% of land represents a much smaller percentage of food production. This is often land in areas that are most environmentally sensitive. In the UK we pay farmers to raise lamb on marginal land yet they still aren't competitive with lamb shipped from the other side of the world. I'm not sure why we should be subsidising that, especially when there is a lot of environmental damaged associated…

Could food security in case of another global crisis be a good enough reason? I don't know anything about the British situation AT ALL, but I think many in Europe think slightly different about the market-based solution when it comes to both food, medicines, and other essentials after corona. It turns out that when shit hits the fan, countries need to handle the basic needs of their population themselves.

People don't need lamb in an emergency.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#249

Post by notRobot »

missedthecue wrote: post #142
notRobot wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The corollary to this would be that deforestation hasn't make climate change worse, and a simple Google search tells me that: > Deforestation plays a significant role in climate change, contributing 12–20% of global greenhouse gas emissions

Most global deforestation involves slash and burn. This releases the carbon stored in the trees. But I think that's OPs point. A growing tree doesn't remove carbon, it temporarily stores it until it dies or burns.

Trees do pull carbon out of the atmosphere, which can be stored in the form of "wood", and it doesn't re-enter the atmosphere until burnt.

Re: Denmark will plant 1B trees and convert 10% of farmland into forest

#250

Post by jdenning »

Ma8ee wrote: post #246
manvillej wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Governments pay to keep food at the cheapest point possible to ensure stability. a fed population doesn't kill their governments. Agriculture is not a regular industry; its a national security issue Farming is not a profitable endeavor. There would be a lot less financial advisors in the world otherwise. A carbon tax will either drive up prices or reduce suppliers, increasing prices. Reducing farmland will require mo…

As you point out, there are several valid reasons to subsidise farming. But then subsidise farming, not carbon emissions! And while you are at it, use those subsidies to encourage farming that is sustainable, both for the climate as well as biodiversity.

What's the point of a carbon tax if it's balanced by a government subsidy?

Edit: Genuinely curious what I'm missing..

Post reply on HN