"But it's good to see that you are thinking about such things"
We have to go over all the alternatives Joe in coming to face up to what must be done.

We have cleared the best land for growing new trees for our own other important purposes. Do we now displace those purposes? Moreover, your faith in sequestration by methods yet undiscovered, and the fact that soil sequestration, especially at the magnitude required, is still at pie in the sky level, means we are fiddling while Rome burns.

Planting trees under "Direct Action" will give us all warm fuzzies, adding to the warmth it's supposed to avert. But, of course, we must go down this path, it appears, before finding the bullet is still in our mouth to be bitten.

Sorry about the crappy metaphors, Joe, but you just have to move forward in your thinking about this.

Luciferade,

Don't we all ?

Joe

G'day SPQR,
I agree that the media focus on CO2 is far too narrow, but to suggest that the IPCC (International Panel for Climate Change) is actually the International Panel for Carbon Dioxide is misguided at best.
The Panel has -I believe- only 12 permanent staff. Contributions are voluntarily made from credible, peer reviewed sources in 120 countries. These sources -Universities, Government and private bodies- cover a range of topics, including not just studies of the atmosphere, but geologists, hydrologists, vulcanologists, oceanographers, agriculturalists, botanists, foresters, biologists, statisticians, physicists...
Population densities, transport, energy requirements; it would be impossible to make any even vaguely accurate predictions without considering these factors.
More people means more cars, more energy requirements, more arable land, more transport, even more cows and pigs farting.
All these factors and more come under the “umbrella” of the IPCC -and have been the cause of derision and mockery from the flat earth side.
Perhaps that's why so much emphasis has been placed on the one indisputable fact;
CO2 is a green house gas, and we humans create heaps of it.

Hi Grim,

The question is what do we do about it all ?

I still favour, among other remedies, massive tree-planting. After all, it shouldn't be difficult to calculate how many pig farts can be countered by every tree planted.

As for those of some OLO contributors, perhaps we would need to increase the planting ratio.

Joe
www.firstsources.info

Joe, I now feel I'm an active audience participant in a children's pantomime, trying to help you realize there's a baddie in the closet.

"The question is what do we do about it all ?"

Are you serious?

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

The world chops down more trees than it plants,
and it would have to plant the equivalent of the
Amazon forest every ten years to accomplish anything.

But I guess telling that to some people is about as
effective as a fart in a blizzard. (Talking about farts).