• monogram@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 days ago

    Governments should enforcement carbon credits for polluters, then we can see it as a carbon tax instead of a greenwashing advertisement, but until then:

    Go to your local representative and ask what they are doing to offset emissions of road upkeep, busses & overall infrastructural fossil dependency!

    • psud@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      Our previous progressive government lost its next election over a price on carbon

      It’s too easy for right wing politics to cast it as “your electricity prices will go up; fuel will get more expensive; you won’t be able to afford to use your gas heater in winter”

      It’s a difficult policy to get, you need a party brave enough to implement it in their first weeks in power so people see it doesn’t hurt by the next election

      • bob_lemon@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        There’s a really easy solution to this problem: Evenly redistribute the carbon tax income to all citizens. That way, prices might increase, but it you manage to have a low carbon footprint, you will end up net positive.

        Although it’s virtually impossible to track on a personal level, so making people actually notice that net gain might prove difficult.

        This is theoretically what we do in Germany, but the government kind of forgot about the paying out part.

        • joshhsoj1902@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          This didn’t work in Canada. That is the carbon pricing system we have and still the opposing party has made it so unpopular every party has said they will remove the system in the next election.

          Despite lots of evidence that the carbon pricing system we have was a net positive for most Canadians, people still are convinced it’s the cause of inflation.

  • monogram@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    The Waterschap may decide to lower the water level. When that happens, the wooden poles are exposed to air. When wood comes in contact with oxygen, it will start to rot. The decay of the wooden foundation is why houses in Amsterdam built on wooden piles can lean to one side.

    https://whatsupwithamsterdam.com/amsterdam-houses-crooked/

    Wood rot only occurs if the water level is too low. Some of these poles have lasted 500 years.

  • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    No shit, carbon capture barely even exists

    The only reason we’re even talking about it is because it would let us have it cake and eat it. It may even be possible some day, but it definitely isn’t the most efficient option

  • Gloria@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 days ago

    It would be too good to be true. Because there is too much Carbon in the air and it would be good if we actually could somehow get it out of the air again. But maybe that is 2120s technology. It would be amazing if the human species were be able to create the problem, realize the problem, counteract to the problem and solve the problem all in one century. But it will take several centuries of uncontrolled climate change before humans will be able to control it in any significant way - if it is not already to late.

    • psud@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      But you need to cut those trees down and place them somewhere they won’t rot

      Sink them to the bottom of the deep ocean, but trees famously float

      Leave them in deserts where the dryness will suppress rot, but damage the desert habitat

      Dump them in peat bogs, but there aren’t enough

      Perhaps it would be best to cook them to charcoal, it releases some carbon into the atmosphere, but it would leave some solid, inedible to anything carbon that can be dumped in any old mine, but that’s expensive

      Also if you dump the whole trees in whatever way, you also dump whatever nutrients are in it

    • ulterno@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Yeah, just get a good ecosystem going and every now and then, collect extra decaying matter and dump it in deep landfills to further reduce carbon escape. Hopefully the pit will be deep enough to stop the decay and prevent instant (in geological terms) biogas formation.

      Ok, I guess that is not very viable. Just go with normal forests then. But that won’t match the predicted numbers because predictions didn’t consider reduction of net Carbon -ive of the forests as they came closer to equilibrium.

      We need way more trees than we previously thought, way sooner than we previously thought. Now, even more since the average temps have already increased, further changing the forest efficiency.