Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Douglas (douglasvb@m.ai6yr.org)'s status on Sunday, 26-Jul-2026 12:17:56 JST Douglas

   So what would happen if net carbon emissions went to zero today? Would we be stuck at 429ppm for a very long time or would the CO2 slowly get absorbed via geologic and biological processes?

   Is this a situation where we need to start planting a ton of trees and then burying them to permanently sequester carbon back in the ground as fast as possible (unlike all of the crazy schemes to somehow sequester carbon via mechanical means)?

   What do the realistic paths back to 275 ppm look like? Are there any?

   • Embed this notice
     Hippy Steve (exador23@m.ai6yr.org)'s status on Sunday, 26-Jul-2026 12:17:55 JST Hippy Steve

     in reply to

     • AI6YR Ben

     @ai6yr @douglasvb

     The easiest way to reduce atmospheric CO2 (assuming we're no longer adding more) is to hack the short carbon cycle that nature is already doing.

     in a nutshell that cycle is: plants drawdown CO2 via photosynthesis converting to living biomass carbon. As parts of the plant die, that biomass begins a 1-20 year process of decomposition wherein the carbon returns to the atmosphere. ruminant animals turn it into methane rather quickly. other decomposers turn it back into CO2 and methane more slowly. And humans/lightning quickly release all that carbon via fire.

     What we need to do on a large scale is hack that carbon cycle so the carbon drawn down by photosynthesis doesn't return to the atmosphere.

     Biochar is the most obvious hack. pyrolytic (high heat/low oxygen fire) turns the biomass into 1000+ year stable carbon that can be added to the soil instead of returning to the atmosphere. 90+% of the carbon can be sequestered this way, with massive benefits to farmers and soil health.

     Regenerative farming is another. The Marin Carbon Project has been doing studies for over 3 decades now and have proven that just 1/4" of compost spread on just 25% of California rangeland would sequester enough carbon to offset all of the state's emissions. (This is why I get upset about the inclusion of cow farts in carbon calculators. That's part of the natural carbon cycle. And by demonizing meat/livestock the green movement alienates the farmers who need to be on our side.)

     There are other ways too. A good starting point is the Rodale Institute White Paper https://rodaleinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/rodale-white-paper.pdf

   • Embed this notice
     AI6YR Ben (ai6yr@m.ai6yr.org)'s status on Sunday, 26-Jul-2026 12:17:56 JST AI6YR Ben

     in reply to

     @douglasvb Apparently we're on quite the lag for impacts, so even if we go to zero carbon emissions tomorrow (not happening), climate change disasters will continue to accelerate for decades before they start tampering off. (in my understanding of the whole thing). Unless we figure out a way to draw down that carbon...

   • Embed this notice
     Hippy Steve (exador23@m.ai6yr.org)'s status on Sunday, 26-Jul-2026 12:17:56 JST Hippy Steve

     in reply to

     • AI6YR Ben

     @ai6yr @douglasvb

     There are 3 separate things to consider along with their lags, interactions with each other, and various feedback loops:

     1. Greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere
     2. Heat in the planet's systems (air, land, water)
     3. Climate impacts.

     As far as the atmosphere goes, the bulk of the human CO2 buildup is going to last for 300-1000yrs after we stop emitting without hacking the carbon cycle for active drawdown. That's one lag.

     As long as the excess greenhouse gasses remain, heat is being actively trapped/added to the planetary system. Much of that heat goes into the oceans. (as does much of the CO2) but with deleterious impact of it's own: acidification, ecosystem impacts, weather & climate impacts, etc. So stopping emissions doesn't stop global warming. That's another lag.

     And since the heat continues to build up - especially in the oceans (which will take a long time to be undone), climate impacts will continue to worsen. Another lag.

     Then there's the interactions between all of those. for example, far too many people are unaware of the hard temperature limits of photosynthesis - the principle means by which plants draw down CO2 from the atmosphere. The laws of physics and chemistry mean that photosynthesis stops working once the ambient cell temperature reaches 100-110F in many plants (including most food crops).

     And then there are the feedback loops. e.g. excessive heat evaporates water resulting in water vapor in the atmosphere. Water vapor is itself a very potent greenhouse gas resulting in more heat buildup in the terrestial system. Or rising global temperatures mean less snow and ice, so the albedo changes resulting in more heat absorbed by the planet, which is why arctic regions are warming 2.5x faster than equatorial regions.

     All of these then impact the climate and weather in ever increasing and unpredictable ways like the ocean currents and jet stream slowing causing ever more drastic impacts.

     While all this sounds dire, I do have hope and will now talk about things we can be doing that will have significant impacts on atmospheric CO2 levels which need to be reduced before anything can get better...

     Steve's Place repeated this.