Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-20-2019, 05:22 PM
 
5,717 posts, read 3,145,508 times
Reputation: 7374

Advertisements

The largest CO2 producer is China, so even if the US went completely carbon neutral, at best, we would hardly put a dent the CO2 levels. So why not advocate for more trees instead, which consume CO2? Instead, all we hear is that we need to ban cars, burgers, transatlantic flight, and collect trillions more in taxes. It sounds more like a giant scam to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-20-2019, 05:29 PM
 
5,957 posts, read 2,875,868 times
Reputation: 7787
There's no money in planting trees,if there was, Arbor day would be a big deal. You answered own question mentioning trillions in taxes to be made.with the passing of the collection plate at the new religion , Climate Change .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2019, 05:32 PM
 
4,985 posts, read 3,963,948 times
Reputation: 10147
$
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2019, 05:33 PM
 
17,303 posts, read 12,242,173 times
Reputation: 17250
That is something that is being done and widely advocated for. As well as carbon recapture industrial plants. That alone just isn't enough.

Shell just put $300 million into it with a goal of reducing their footprint...2-3%.
https://www.shell.com/media/news-and...emissions.html

Planting trees isn't free and would also take a ton of money at scale.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2019, 05:35 PM
 
Location: Haiku
7,132 posts, read 4,766,627 times
Reputation: 10327
It is not possible to plant a sufficient number of trees to soak up all the CO2. You can easily run the numbers to see this but one thing to realize is that the the carboniferous epoch, which is when carbon that became fossil fuel was sequestered, lasted about 60 million years. We are emptying it in a span of a couple of hundred years. There is way more carbon in fossil fuel than can go into trees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2019, 05:43 PM
 
Location: CO/UT/AZ/NM Catch me if you can!
6,926 posts, read 6,934,737 times
Reputation: 16509
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoByFour View Post
It is not possible to plant a sufficient number of trees to soak up all the CO2. You can easily run the numbers to see this but one thing to realize is that the the carboniferous epoch, which is when carbon that became fossil fuel was sequestered, lasted about 60 million years. We are emptying it in a span of a couple of hundred years. There is way more carbon in fossil fuel than can go into trees.
What TwobyFour said. Environmentalists are all for people planting more trees and there's been any number of studies done in this regard. Unfortunately, the studies show that there's simply not enough arable land left to plant all the millions of trees that would be required. I've been planting all the trees I possibly can all over the property I live on, but I do this out of my love for trees, not because I expect trees to solve the climate crisis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2019, 05:44 PM
 
5,717 posts, read 3,145,508 times
Reputation: 7374
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoByFour View Post
It is not possible to plant a sufficient number of trees to soak up all the CO2.
If that's true, why aren't we dying of CO2 poisoning?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2019, 05:50 PM
 
17,303 posts, read 12,242,173 times
Reputation: 17250
Quote:
Originally Posted by neko_mimi View Post
If that's true, why aren't we dying of CO2 poisoning?
Suffocation from CO2 starts at 5000ppm. The atmosphere just rose to 410ppm this year. It's rising by 2-4ppm per year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2019, 06:01 PM
 
18,432 posts, read 8,266,769 times
Reputation: 13764
..and we...the USA...had nothing to do with increasing CO2....we reduced it

https://4k4oijnpiu3l4c3h-zippykid.ne...8/07/bpco2.png
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2019, 06:02 PM
 
6,835 posts, read 2,399,004 times
Reputation: 2727
This is where I wish we had those Star Trek replicators. Imagine the amount of trees we could do and potentially with no money other than the research and development fees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:15 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top