britanica Posted June 23, 2023 Posted June 23, 2023 It seems anytime man has his way with mother earth, we both end up more damaged. Carbon is needed for trees to thrive, as well as other plants. They absorb it and in tern, make oxygen. Assuming I am remembering my science correctly - if we were to focus on reducing carbon, wouldn't this have a negative impact on not on trees but plant life and already fragile ecosystems? 1 Quote
YellowDragon Posted June 24, 2023 Posted June 24, 2023 Even with "green" measures, we have shown ourselves that any level of change, good or bad, needs to happen slowly or it will destroy a lot of things. They are in a rush to change too much too soon and it has disaster written all over it. 1 Quote
Cosmic Posted June 25, 2023 Posted June 25, 2023 23 hours ago, YellowDragon said: Even with "green" measures, we have shown ourselves that any level of change, good or bad, needs to happen slowly or it will destroy a lot of things. They are in a rush to change too much too soon and it has disaster written all over it. This is my biggest issue with it all. Like I think we all should make changes to better the planet but it is very dangerous to rush things. Even with them trying to rush people onto EVs from standard, it is going to effect a lot of things, some for the better and some for the worst. We just don't know! This is why things should be done slowly!! 1 Quote
JRexx Posted June 26, 2023 Posted June 26, 2023 It seems like everything they are doing is screwing up society and generally making it harder for nature to flourish. I don't understand it. Like they keep saying we need to reduce the population... Yet everything points to how bad that would be for all of humanity. 1 Quote
rocala Posted July 16, 2023 Posted July 16, 2023 (edited) On 6/23/2023 at 10:49 PM, britanica said: It seems anytime man has his way with mother earth, we both end up more damaged. Carbon is needed for trees to thrive, as well as other plants. They absorb it and in tern, make oxygen. Assuming I am remembering my science correctly - if we were to focus on reducing carbon, wouldn't this have a negative impact on not on trees but plant life and already fragile ecosystems? No it would not be a problem. Animal life breathes out carbon dioxide and plant life absorbs this, removes the carbon part for food and releases the oxygen for us to breathe in again. It is a system of exchange and balance. The present problem is a surplus of carbon in the atmosphere, much of it from man made sources, that is why carbon removal schemes usually include more planting and protecting nature. Edited July 16, 2023 by rocala 1 Quote
britanica Posted July 17, 2023 Author Posted July 17, 2023 On 7/16/2023 at 11:55 AM, rocala said: No it would not be a problem. Animal life breathes out carbon dioxide and plant life absorbs this, removes the carbon part for food and releases the oxygen for us to breathe in again. It is a system of exchange and balance. The present problem is a surplus of carbon in the atmosphere, much of it from man made sources, that is why carbon removal schemes usually include more planting and protecting nature. Wouldn't the solution then be to plant more trees and make use of algae and other carbon consuming plants? I mean out o-zone layer is repairing itself so clearly it is not as damaging up there as we originally thought. Maybe this is why temps are cooling down as well. Quote
YellowDragon Posted July 18, 2023 Posted July 18, 2023 I am sure some of the findings are correct and things can be done but instead of focusing on solutions, some people only seek to cause more problems. Like think of all the stop oil people. If we were to stop it 100% right now, millions if not billions of people would die and they don't understand how it is possible. 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.