Re: CO2 sequestration

[Rick Tarara <rtarara@SAINTMARYS.EDU>]

On a more serious note--the idea here is to sequester enough carbon over the
next 100 or so years such that we reduce the 'greenhouse' effect so that we
can wean ourselves off the fossil fuels replacing them with more
environmentally friendly energy sources.  The latter is no mean trick to
accomplish, but let's assume we do figure that part out.  Then a massive
reforestation program during the next century does have a chance of success.
I don't have any figures on how many trees and what the total effect might
be, but it seems like a step in the right direction.  Then 100-150 years
from now, with man-made carbon emissions at minimal levels, the decay of the
now 100-year old forests should be manageable.  At least, to my knowledge,
there is no evidence in the fossil record that the earth was appreciably
warmer when a much larger percentage of the planet was covered in trees.
This perhaps causes another problem--competition between the forests and the
'green' energy sources for land.  Learning how (and what) to farm in a
forest environment would help as well.

Rick

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Denker" <jsd@AV8N.COM>

> Rick Tarara wrote:
>
> > Plant LOTS of trees?
>
> I hear that suggestion a lot.  Alas it only works to the
> extent that
>  a) the trees live forever (or die and don't decay), which
>   is not a serious proposal, or
>  b) you use the wood as fuel, to the exclusion of fossil
>   carbon fuels.
>
> The point is that carbon atoms are conserved.  If you are
> steadily depleting large stores of fossil carbon, the
> carbon atoms must be steadily accumulating somewhere else.