Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Whoops! The Atlantic Makes Trump Look EPIC In Cover Intended as a Smear
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2024 22:16:16 -0700
Organization: home user
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <robertaw-F3C293.22161604102024@news.individual.net>
References: <20240913a@crcomp.net> <vdn1t8$3sog6$1@dont-email.me> <vdn6l6$fip$1@panix2.panix.com> <vFGLO.120073$WtV9.87808@fx10.iad> <vdnlle$313t$1@dont-email.me> <vdp2v6$987c$2@dont-email.me> <vdpc22$anou$2@dont-email.me>
X-Trace: individual.net qCBbJUboNzs7ei27dSOjPwO/BLDBoZHHSydpV5JL3oXAnf1KMI
X-Orig-Path: robertaw
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9KVAla5NOddtnuS6A3J6f1Mnqtg= sha256:ISjmAeR7HRUo3pGpFz5/DvatBcb30svQWd3WWb5NXuI=
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.2 (Intel Mac OS X)
Bytes: 3107

In article <vdpc22$anou$2@dont-email.me>,
 William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

> Cryptoengineer wrote:
> > On 10/3/2024 10:58 PM, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
> >> In article <vFGLO.120073$WtV9.87808@fx10.iad>,
> >> Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >>> This one sounds interesting.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2024/09/26/carbon-atmosph
> >>> ere-burying-wood/ 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Would take a lot of wood; there are some fast growing but
> >>> otherwise useless trees (you-clipped-us, for example) that
> >>> would be suitable for this purpose.
> >>
> >> I hesitate to mention hemp (since my impression is that most
> >> of the people pushing hemp are really more interested in the
> >> wacky tabaky variety) but hemp (the non-psychoactive kind)
> >> does have some seriously good points. It's fast growing,
> >> nitrogen fixing, produces what's apparently a good quality
> >> fiber, and if you grow a big excess and bury the excess...
> >> I think it would be pulling carbon out of the air faster
> >> than trees, which are pretty slow growing.
> >>
> >> There may be other plants that are even better at this.
> > 
> > Seeding the open ocean with iron is also proposed - creates
> > an algal bloom, which dies and sinks to the ocean floor.
> 
> Only in some areas, with a high silica content.  Otherwise it just dies 
> and rots.

Which is not good.

> > 
> > The ecological side effects are not well studied.
> 
> Still well worth studying, in my opinion.  We should not be leaving any 
> stones unturned.

There is a carbon dioxide reservoir that is truly immense (estimated to 
have already taken in as much carbon dioxide that is in the atmosphere 
of Venus), but it is really slow. Since we can't wait the tens of 
thousands of years that it will need to absorb the current bubble of 
CO2, is there any way to speed it up a few orders of magnitude?

-- 
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
—-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com