Quico can surely estimate the rate of return of carbon-valued resources (eg, the full cost, including opportunity cost of sunk capital (ships! Still afloat) of hauling rust out to the nearest gyre, to get a geoengineered Sargossa-ish sinks.
Same with all other projects.
I deny that developing projects to put the forests on carbon-sink recovery trajectories, while reducing the risk of large-scale oxidation in existing forests, is Climate Feel, although here in the Northern Sierra where we are demonstrating at-scale work and benefit it Feels mighty Good.
We are standing up a real live carbon bank here, the kind that supports the transformation of dollars (or whatever) into bankable avoided-carbon.
Value grows on and under trees, so long as it doesn't all go up in smoke all at once.
Thanks, Quico. I agree that "climate feels" in terms of carbon projects has a bad rap. But it does have the advantage of boots on the ground, and that's not nothing. We need to work on an "all of the above" approach to priorities. I am super glad to hear that there is some discussion of the macro picture at Climate Week, though. I can tell you that at the state level here in NH, the donut hole of New England in terms of the clean energy transition, our approach (greens, democrats, enviros, etc) is to talk about the cost advantages of renewables vs the possible fantastical bet on nuclear which is the preferred option for the so-called realists and not lead anymore with climate change as an imperative.
Carbon economy now.
Quico can surely estimate the rate of return of carbon-valued resources (eg, the full cost, including opportunity cost of sunk capital (ships! Still afloat) of hauling rust out to the nearest gyre, to get a geoengineered Sargossa-ish sinks.
Same with all other projects.
I deny that developing projects to put the forests on carbon-sink recovery trajectories, while reducing the risk of large-scale oxidation in existing forests, is Climate Feel, although here in the Northern Sierra where we are demonstrating at-scale work and benefit it Feels mighty Good.
We are standing up a real live carbon bank here, the kind that supports the transformation of dollars (or whatever) into bankable avoided-carbon.
Value grows on and under trees, so long as it doesn't all go up in smoke all at once.
Thanks, Quico. I agree that "climate feels" in terms of carbon projects has a bad rap. But it does have the advantage of boots on the ground, and that's not nothing. We need to work on an "all of the above" approach to priorities. I am super glad to hear that there is some discussion of the macro picture at Climate Week, though. I can tell you that at the state level here in NH, the donut hole of New England in terms of the clean energy transition, our approach (greens, democrats, enviros, etc) is to talk about the cost advantages of renewables vs the possible fantastical bet on nuclear which is the preferred option for the so-called realists and not lead anymore with climate change as an imperative.
Nuclear power? (“God’s Gift to Mankind”?!)
BTW:
https://www.thirdway.org/memo/an-explainer-guide-to-carbon-dioxide-removal