this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
272 points (94.4% liked)

Technology

59669 readers
4135 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The US just invested more than $1 billion into carbon removal / The move represents a big step in the effort to suck CO2 out of the atmosphere—and slow down climate change.::undefined

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ottomateeverything 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That's not what that article says. At all.

As mentioned in the article, moss is pretty good at pulling particulates out of the air and "cleaning" it in that sense.

But trying to get CO2 out of the air isn't the same. Trees are very effective at this because they have a lot of mass and density and are largely carbon themselves. When we talk about "carbon sequestering", we're generally talking things like trees because that carbon from the air has to go somewhere and having a huge dense chunk of carbon is basically the most efficient natural method.

Moss is good at removing other particles, but trees are generally still better at carbon sequestering and CO2 removal.

Semi related: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/187327/how-plants-carbon-affects-their-response/

TL;DR - if you want to suck up a lot of CO2, you basically want a massive plant. Moss isn't one of them.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

My bad, sorry and thanks for correcting me