• UristMcHolland@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I would rather them just spend 1.2 billion planting trees. Just plant a shitload of trees, that’s it.

    • qjkxbmwvz@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      How efficient at sinking carbon are trees? As in, once the tree decomposes, the carbon gets largely released back into the air.

      But yeah, “shitload of trees” + “some way of storing them at end of life that doesn’t result in carbon back into the atmosphere” seems like a pretty solid plan.

    • deafboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Trees are great. Except they love to burn. Either as a fuel, or as part of the forest fire.

      That’s why I hate when the corporations do carbon offseting by planting trees.

        • gmtom@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean have you been reading the news lately about the multiple massive wildfires throughout the world?

        • deafboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t want to sound like a fatalist, but there is actually no upper limit.