About CO2, Highlights from SLUSH2019

Posted on Leave a comment

Picked up from SLUSH and Swedish radio channel P1 news, 3rd week November.

We can agree there is a rise in temperature, around the globe. If in doubt, one has to be willing to PULL the information – to do ones’ own research.

Is there a CO2 problem? Well, is the air clean in – and around – most cities these days? Does far more people die from lung related diseases, directly connected to the air we breath? Yes.

There is an imbalance in terms of CO2 created, and CO2 re-bound into material. Organic and non-organic. Far more CO2 is released, than ‘sucked’ away from the atmosphere.

There are many ways to ‘capture’ CO2. And many ways will be needed, because one single way will not be sufficient. Many streams form a river. One way is to catch and press beneath soil, for example as a way to counter-pressure the wells in oil and gas exploatation. We talk about large – energy consuming – compressors. Not so CO2-footprint-friendly…

However, there are far more easier ways. More inexpensive ways. The way is to plant trees. As trees capture CO2 during their whole growth. And keep doing so, until either burned or decomposing. Wood is needed, in furniture, for building houses and buildings themselves. Which is a growing market.

About De-composing of trees. At this point of a lifecycle of trees, it is good to keep in mind that a forest is good to keep clean of fallen trees. Unless it is a protected, untouched ‘old’ forest. Point being, new forests need to be planted – and looked after.

As we have a market economy – capitalism – we should create an economic way for the planting of trees. A motivation. Where there is a balance between exploatation and re-investment. Between emission and capture. For example, to go from cutting down entire forests – or other heavy (factory) CO2 emission – towards creating new forests. Or be penalized, if not investing in (paying for) the planting of trees.

Heard on Radio

Meanwhile, leaders / politicians of Asian and Latin American countries feel that EU and Californian activities is just an unfair ‘green movement’. These leaders (and people?) feel that a finger is being pointed at them, whilst people of EU and other regions have an agenda ‘to make life better for themselves’ at the expence of other regions. For example, that their farmers have been unfairly targeted, for burning down forest for new cultivation land. While in the USA there are large – wast – fields without any forest to be seen.

Meaning, there is a truth in both camps. “Ours and theirs”. Additionally, we are all driven by capitalism. Growth, and profit of business.

In conclusion, we all need to do our own part. Everything doesn’t have to be for profit. Survival (humanity) and sustainability must come first.

Is the air clean where you live? Could it be better, cleaner? Do you support your local business, when possible, instead of buying overseas? Is your local producer / seller sustainable in terms of emissions?

We can vote with : the politicians we vote for, the agenda sitting politicians should drive, our own feet, and our wallet. Push / Pull.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.