Home Page
   Articles
       links
About Us    
Traders        
Recipes            
Latest Articles
well done

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Conservation and Environment
Author 
 Message
dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46219
Location: yes
PostPosted: Sat Nov 13, 21 4:20 pm    Post subject: well done Reply with quote
    

down a hole

well done chaps, never take it too far

at least a couple of million a day and some publicity, nice asymmetric and fluffy

40 days and nights is the record, they are all anonymous, butler and nurse when they got out

HS2 has been sold as useful, reality is it is a cash cow for carpet baggers

Mistress Rose



Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Posts: 15972

PostPosted: Sun Nov 14, 21 9:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Railways are a useful way to transport things, but H2S strikes me as a vanity project, not a useful way to transport people or goods. Doubling up lines would probably be less damaging to ancient woodland, which has little protection at present, and cannot be replicated. Planting small sticks in the ground is far less useful that managing a woodland which will produce thousands of sticks the same size in a far smaller area.

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46219
Location: yes
PostPosted: Sun Nov 14, 21 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

there are better ways to spend the cash on rail transport

upgrade the commuter network
restore the freight network, not insisting on 6% profit if the job will make 3% would make a huge difference to the viability of rail logistics

upgrade the intercity network (25% faster and more often seems plausible)and put the subsidies into fare pricing rather than shareholder profits

greenish, value for money, not much scope for carpet baggers

sgt.colon



Joined: 27 Jul 2009
Posts: 7380
Location: Just south of north.
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 21 8:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

It's nice to see swampy is still doing his thing.

When they talk about planting trees to offset against carbon, does anyone know how long it takes that one tree to offset the carbon it is planted for?

Mistress Rose



Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Posts: 15972

PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 21 8:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

A very long time is all I can say. Putting a stick in the ground takes a few years for it to really establish, then it starts growing. It is far better to retain existing woodland or start managing woodland as the trees expand their canopy to fill the holes being the equivalent of thousands of sticks in the ground. It is impossible to 'replace' ancient woodland. We have an area in our wood that was planted up from a small field between 1935 and 1955 and it is still possible to see the difference in the ground flora.

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46219
Location: yes
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 21 9:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

sgt.colon wrote:
It's nice to see swampy is still doing his thing.

When they talk about planting trees to offset against carbon, does anyone know how long it takes that one tree to offset the carbon it is planted for?


2nd thing first, a thousand years or so is a teenage forest, once the last of the milk teeth are shed it will be adult

an adult forest will continue to "learn"(gain species) until the environment has changed enough to make forest impossible, ie millions of years in some circumstances, tens of thousands in others

as to off setting carbon, fast growth and long term use as timber is a fair bet
for geoengineering long term forest is nice, less pretty but more important are the slimy things that live in the top few feet of the oceans

the sea is a far bigger "lung" than any existing or plausible land forest

part 2 see pm

Slim



Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Posts: 6612
Location: New England (In the US of A)
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 21 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

You see the article about the newer understanding of whale feeding, and the notion that because they can eat so much more than previously realized, the impact of their ocean fertilization was underestimated, and what was once thought of as a wacky geoenginrering project to iron fertilize the ocean, may be a good idea to help the return of whales, and sequester more carbon in the process.

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46219
Location: yes
PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 21 11:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

the few bits of surface rock the terrestrials live on sustain less than 20% of life

if i went for the gaia analogy, the sea is our amniotic fluid and the rocks are our umbilicus

deep......


Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Conservation and Environment All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1
View Latest Posts View Latest Posts

 

Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group
Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
Copyright � 2004 marsjupiter.com