Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
If conservatives (or dems) were smart they'd lean hard into something like the CCC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Conservation_Corps?wprov=sfla1
Teach young people life skills, lift a whole generation out of poverty, plant and manage forests, fix up our infrastructure... So much could be done. A modern, environment-focused CCC would be revolutionary, and I would bet whoever runs with some form of that idea first sweeps the following elections.
It was proposed as part of the Green New Deal but hasn't been able to meaningful funding through the Senate. Too many Republicans working with a handful of bought-off Democrats
I didn't know that! Neat. I hope it stays a part of the conversation.
We actually had that through the VISTA and Americorps programs in the 90s and early 2000s (I believe Americorps is still around). I was a volunteer for VISTA in 2003, just as the Bush Administration shredded the program. They signed us up on the promise that our student loans would have their payments covered while we volunteered, then refused to deliver for six months. It wasn't until then Senator Hillary Clinton got involved that they reversed their decision, and by that time I and half the class were forced by financial reasons to drop out of the program. The living stipend they gave us was only $740 a month, and we were forbidden to take outside jobs. Throw student loan payments on top of that and there was no way to survive.
The Bush admin knew this, and they continued to dismantle the program, using the disastrous drop-out rates of the class of 2003 as an excuse for further cuts. VISTA is now gone, and with it the specific part of Americorps that was focused on poverty relief.
The reason we don't have these programs anymore is because the conservatives have deliberately dismantled them, not because the left hasn't tried again and again to use government towards building real value in our society.
My favorite part about history is learning how conservatives fucked up things that used to be good.
We should really just call them regressives because that is what they are.
I've been saying this for years. It never should have stopped but the Republicans are hell bent on destroying anything good that the government can do for us.
Bet this would somehow this would turn into gov handouts to logging companies.
It's the only reason neoliberals do anything.
There was a post the other day about how painting rooftops white could reduce temperatures, with a small handful of people saying they'd "consider it when their roof needed replacing".
The only way that idea would have an impact is if there were strong regulations and incentives backing it to encourage widespread adoption.
The only way we'd ever get those regulations from a neoliberal politician is if they had shares in a white paint company.
A trillion? Do they know how many trees that is, and how long that would take?
I think many Republicans have always had the opinion of "we will just fix it when or if it becomes a problem", despite the fact that most studies (and common sense) has shown that it will be harder and harder (and more expensive) the longer we wait, or possibly not fixable at all.
So to answer your question: No, they have no fucking clue how long it will take or how much it will cost to plant 1 trillion trees.
It would take much longer for the trees to become effective carbon capture utilities than the destruction caused by coal mines and fossil fuels the Rs would likely push alongside their newfound climate wisdom.
Hybrid willows and poplars grow about 8ft per year in ideal conditions.
Trees are expensive, and planting trees means you can hire workers to perform back breaking work for little pay. It's surprising that republicans are just now realizing that they can grift this to hell and back.
Most trees are not expensive if you plant them from seed or buy them as a small sapling.
Source: I buy/grow a lot of trees and browse a lot of nurseries.
Sure. But whatever cost it is times a trillion is a lot, and there's a multiplicative effect. The value of the trees will compound over time, and very likely private entities will be able to harvest those trees for sale. A non zero amount of any proceeds will eventually make their way into politicians' donations.
I always thought we should plant hybrid poplar or maybe empress trees. Then coppice and turn the wood to biochar.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coppicing
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biochar
You can do it multiple times and take cuttings to grow new trees. I dont know how much land a pig farm needs, but if it's like chicken factories, they basically live in cramped spaces. So you can dump the biochar into the pig shit. Let it soak up the nutrients and then fertilize the stumps.
The biochar is now stable carbon that will be sequestered in the ground for hundreds of years
I have been planting hybrid poplars and willows for three years. I'm bad at it, and lazy. So I basically just walk out to the semi-swamp behind my house and push sticks in the ground. I now have about 15 trees, 8ft to 26ft, and I'm slowly turning my backyard into a shady alcove.
Unfortunately the hybrid poplar only lives for 30 years, but you can plant longer living trees (maples, pines, oaks) while the initial batch is growing. Then bury the wood of the poplars to sequester the carbon.
The link to that chart appears to be broken.
Thanks. A clean version is here: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/figures/summary-for-policymakers/figure-spm-7/
I'm still down to see them try. We could always use more trees and a trillion seems like a fine addition to our collection.
I'm worried this is an excuse to divert funds away from more practical solutions