
Reforestation effort could capture 205 gigatons of CO2 in 40-100 years - simonebrunozzi
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/365/6448/76
======
omosubi
I'm skeptical that this will even happen but if so, hopefully it's done with
an eye towards restoring some semblance of biodiversity rather than just a
climate change mitigation technique. The road to hell is paved with good
intentions

------
moneytide1
We could even mobilize some military aircraft for the effort:

[https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-
scienc...](https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-
science/aerial-reforestation2.htm)

This should be less of a labor saving method and more for accessing difficult
terrain. Would probably be more successful with human labor.

~~~
mlinksva
It looks like that article is 10 years old. Has anyone done this at scale? A
more recent (this year) talk advocating for similar, but using drones
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyQvfaW54NU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyQvfaW54NU)

~~~
kyriakos
Unless the area is very remote and hard to get to I think it would cost less
and have a higher chance of success if they are planted the traditional way
manually

------
adrianN
This is good news since it really doesn't look like we'll manage to stop our
emissions in time to prevent catastrophic warming and we'll need additional
measures that actively remove carbon from the atmosphere.

But I fear that this will just be used as excuse to do even less to reach
reduction goal.

~~~
vixen99
If effect, your comment reads 'we could stop emissions in time to prevent a
worldwide catastrophy but have decided not to do so'. Imagine a similar
scenario replacing CAGW with an asteroid on course for Earth!

The reason is simple: governments (the only bit of the 'we' who can actually
implement significant measures forcibly if necessary) don't actually believe
in CAGW though they (and just about everybody else and their dog) pay fulsome
lip service to the idea.

------
dang
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20360513](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20360513)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20356859](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20356859)

~~~
simonebrunozzi
Hey @dang,

I wasn't aware of these two recent postings, thanks for sharing them.

It could be useful when submitting to HN to see whether there have been
similar or identical stories submitted recently.

------
H8crilA
At a constant 2014 level of ~35 gigatons CO2 per year this would slow down the
process by 7 years. Better than nothing but this is still far from a cure.

