• Deebster
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    “There’s no silver bullet here, but there’s some silver buckshot, hopefully.”

    This is something it’s easy to forget. Small improvements are still improvements, and enough of them will get us there. Don’t let doomscrolling (and stories like this) lead you into despair and apathy.

    • Zorque@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      10 months ago

      I mean, the main problem is all they’re trying to do is offset what they’re doing… so they can continue doing it. Most companies aren’t looking to find a solution, just a band-aid until someone else fixes the problem for them.

      Which isn’t going to happen, cause it’s not “economically feasible”.

    • DigitalNirvana@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’ve read some things about old growth forests actually increasing sequestration, compared to younger trees. This is the first I’ve heard of reaching saturation, dang. I mean I figured soil just keeps getting deeper, alas, it appears to not be so easy. Made me think, heck they should adopt these practices on the ‘land next over’. Tho’ I think those studies were in the PacificNW North American continent, it seems the same principles should apply, tho’ not necessarily the same species. Tho’ only a double handful of species are as longevitous as Sequoias. Ah, took a sec, here’s Jared Farmer : Thinking About Time with Trees https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/long-now-seminars-about-long-term-thinking/id186908455?i=1000639485066