Netweather goes carbon neutral

[Iceberg]

Don't worry I have one of the winding handle power supply things that they use out in Africa. :lol: .

I am also often mistaken for a Rhino and am use to much worse in here it's all friendly at the end of the day.

It's all about carbon sinks and taking CO2 out of a long term sink(oil, coal) where it's locked away for millions of years and putting it into short term sinks for 40-50 years doesn't really do very much, at the end of the day your still putting it in the short term atmospheric carbon cycle and not taking it back out again, unless they have a way of turning mature tree's into coal and putting it back into the ground.

[Osbourne One-Nil]

Even better than that, scientists have invented a way to plant new trees when old ones die.

[VillagePlank]

Not sure what you're expecting people to do DB, not reply because they are in the majority? I see nothing in this thread which would constitute bullying, people are giving their opinions - the majority at this time are in agreement but that can change if more people decide to give their thoughts.

Nah. I don't think so.

[Iceberg]

Yes, but all the co2 taken by the tree very quickly gets released straight back out.

And are people in 50 years time going to pay again for the co2 they released 50 years ago.

VP something tells me your right

[jethro]

I'm not knocking anyone's effort to be more planet aware or their efforts to do there bit but I do have reservations about the validity of planting trees, got to say I agree with the posts above; it's fairly ineffectual long term. Plus, I found this:

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=21214

[Tim B]

Nice move, I like it!

About the carbon loop stuff that was mentioned earlier, I doubt that applies as much nowadays anyway as much as it did 30 - 50 years ago. As after all the bigger nations of the world aren't locked in a cycle of setting off ever bigger and better atmospheric nuclear bomb tests.

[PersianPaladin]

See this is what puts people off doing anything. Because as soon as they do someone comes along and says, why don't you do more, and when they do they're still not satisfied! You can't please some people.

I agree.

And Paul's intentions seem good. Planting new trees is good as well because it helps reabsorb CO2.

[VillagePlank]

Planting new trees is good as well because it helps reabsorb CO2.

Unless they evolve into a non-carbon lifeform ... the more trees the greater the chance ...

[PersianPaladin]

I'm not knocking anyone's effort to be more planet aware or their efforts to do there bit but I do have reservations about the validity of planting trees, got to say I agree with the posts above; it's fairly ineffectual long term. Plus, I found this:

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=21214

No.

It is simplistic to say that temperate forest biomes 'warm' the planet. They actually tend to moderate temperatures rather than the two extremes of heat and cold which results from defforestation.

Unless they evolve into a non-carbon lifeform ... the more trees the greater the chance ...

Hehe....evolution is irrelevant.

[VillagePlank]

Hehe....evolution is irrelevant.

So, they too, will be inalienably assimiliated into the entropic dross to which we are all destined?

[PersianPaladin]

So, they too, will be inalienably assimiliated into the entropic dross to which we are all destined?

Or perhaps this?

[Guest Viking141]

Paul must be sitting shaking his head and no wonder. He tries to do something good, irrespective of any arguments about whether it does or does not help reduce carbon emissions, planting trees is a good thing anyway, full stop and what he gets is 3 pages of, well, this! Dear oh dear oh dear.

[Paul]

I wouldn't worry Bob, I never expected anything different to this thread - any discussion is good discussion so no problems!

[PersianPaladin]

The affect of evapo-transpiration and evaporative-cooling in forests is important in regulating temperatures. It seems that with less vegetation around, we lower humidity, evapotranspiration, gaseous fixation, and this will result in net-heating exponentially. Also, the warming in these forests at a low-level is balanced out by the cooling from cloud-development, evaporative cooling at a higher level. Mid-level advection is the main route for airmass movement around the globe and from biome to biome....so I don't think planting more trees would be counter-productive.

A warm moist world is better than an overly hot and dry world.

Edited July 10, 2007 by PersianPaladin