this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2025
128 points (100.0% liked)

News

30380 readers
2596 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Planting trees has plenty of benefits, but this popular carbon-removal method alone can’t possibly counteract the planet-warming emissions caused by the world’s largest fossil-fuel companies. To do that, trees would have to cover the entire land mass of North and Central America, according to a study out Thursday.

Many respected climate scientists and institutions say removing carbon emissions — not just reducing them — is essential to tackling climate change. And trees remove carbon simply by “breathing.”

But crunching the numbers, researchers found that the trees’ collective ability to remove carbon through photosynthesis can’t stand up to the potential emissions from the fossil fuel reserves of the 200 largest oil, gas and coal fuel companies — there’s not enough available land on Earth to feasibly accomplish that.

top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 minutes ago

What if we plant a tree on the freshly-dug grave of every billionaire?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 hours ago

Good. hardest part of a solution is figuring out what we need. , now let's go drop apple tree seeds everywhere.

Not kidding. Couldn't hurt

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging!

By all means, feel free to figure out about filling it back in second, but that's doomed to failure if you skip step 1.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 hours ago

It's been great if we could slow down the rate at which the digging is increasing, for starters. Even that'd be a thing to see.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 10 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 hours ago

I would love to live in a tree house

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 hours ago

It's almost like we only really had one option this entire time!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Can't they use Russia instead?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I'd hold off until the current management is fired.

All the funds would get stolen to pay for big titties on mistresses and a pleasure yacht.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago

I doubt Russia is unique

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago

As an European, that works for me.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

And even if you did do that, where would you store the wood afterwards? You can't let it decay, that'd just put the carbon back into the atmosphere.

[–] cogitase 3 points 7 hours ago

PV-powered drying and pyrolysis with capture and bottling of the wood gas would maximize the carbon sequestration ability of forest land. The pine species used for lumber and paper production are actually very good at capturing carbon during their growth stage and a lot of that land in the SE US has been sold off as demand for paper dropped off. The biochar produced from that process can also be added to soil, increasing its productivity and carbon sequestration rate.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

You think trees don't die and fall down on their own?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

And the rest of them just stay frozen upright forever, I suppose.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

As long as new trees start at a higher rate than the old ones fall down...

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

That would require an ever-increasing amount of forested land. A carbon pyramid scheme. As soon as you stop increasing the forest's area it goes back to an equilibrium of trees decaying equalling trees growing.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

By the time we run out of land we'll all be long gone, and there will be complementary solutions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Another problem with storing carbon as cellulose is it uses up all the available water. So the trees would need to be cut down and turned into charcoal to release the H's and O's, and then buried.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 hours ago

The world isn't short of water. I'd be more concerned about phosphorus and other such mineral nutrients, those would get pulled out of the soil and then not returned.

Frankly, I think the best approach to sequestration is to make plastic and bury it. Plastic has a much more controllable chemical structure, you can be sure to only get carbon that way.