Comment on Entropy? Never heard of it.

• JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Yeah, but then you need to cut them down and burry them so that decomposition doesn’t release the co2 again. And it takes a lot of land, which can be prohibitive on the scale we’ll need.

  Another interesting option is fertilizing parts of the ocean for algie to grow. Cody’sLab has an interesting video on a possible way to do that with intentionally crashing astroids into the ocean. youtu.be/z7u_IqzkJzE youtu.be/2zQb_OitsaY

  All of these, plus mechanical direct air carbon capture are methods of carbon capture. The right answer will likely be some mix of all of them.

  source

  • nonfuinoncuro@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    that’s why I just throw all my used paper in the trash to be buried in landfills #doingmypart #onlykindajoking

    source
  • psud@aussie.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    You may be able to get away with stacking the cut trees in deserts, where the dryness may prevent bacterial action

    source
  • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    yeah, i guess the algae would also have a counter-effect to global warming.

    however, one must be a bit more sensitive about it, as it’s a biological process and can mess with the biological world around it. consider: somewhen in the 1970s, a huge cargo ship full of fertilizer (ammonia) sank in the ocean and it lead to a huge algae-growth in the middle of the ocean.

    it definitely took some CO2 out of the air, but these algae often also produce lots of toxins as a by-product (to keep predators away), so that lead to a massive fish-dying. which is not so wishable, either.

    so anyway, i guess taking CO2 out of the air can happen, but it should happen slowly, such as to not strain the environment too much.

    source
• bountygiver@lemmy.ml ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  yup, turns out burning coal is us literally releasing carbon that was already stored ages ago.

  source
• Lemminary@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Aren’t there better plants? I remember reading that some forms of algae are way more efficient or something like that.

  source

  • psud@aussie.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    The company that was trying to use bacteria to make fuel from water and the CO2 from the air shut down a few years ago

    source
  • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    see my comment above … yes, algae can take out lots of CO2 from the atmosphere,

    in fact i remember reading that 50% of the global photosynthesis actually happens in the oceans.

    also, the algae have the advantage that they might automatically sink to the bottom of the ocean, thus taking the carbon out of the atmosphere permanently. but i’m not sure about that, in fact. also, something similar could be achieved with wetlands, such as marsh and swamp, which bind organic material underwater. that water is oxygen-depleted, so it conserves the organic material permanently. this is how peat is created.

    source