The climate conversation would be so different if we had a $10/100-year ton of CO2 removal
What about ppm CO2 in the atmosphere? Is 350 ppm a reasonable goal? I read where it is now about 422 ppm.
Also, how much will it cost for all 10 billion+ plus of us (by 2050) to have a decent standard of living (for example, the average European today) provided by non-emitting energy? In addition to the ocean, maybe there are solutions to free up much more of the land we currently use for agriculture and rewild it. https://www.rebootfood.org/ & https://www.weplanet.org/_files/ugd/dccfdc_a188b91be43643ec9a6358b8f144fba1.pdf
This really does seem to me like the way to make the climate discussion both rational and practical.
What about ppm CO2 in the atmosphere? Is 350 ppm a reasonable goal? I read where it is now about 422 ppm.
Also, how much will it cost for all 10 billion+ plus of us (by 2050) to have a decent standard of living (for example, the average European today) provided by non-emitting energy? In addition to the ocean, maybe there are solutions to free up much more of the land we currently use for agriculture and rewild it. https://www.rebootfood.org/ & https://www.weplanet.org/_files/ugd/dccfdc_a188b91be43643ec9a6358b8f144fba1.pdf
This really does seem to me like the way to make the climate discussion both rational and practical.