#co2 compensation

[schlorian]

#inktober52forest #inktober52 #forest #co2 compensation #climate change #fraud #cartoon #drawing

[clonerightsagenda]

May I ask what the 'no sex in space' rant is? Zero G sounds like fun :<

The space sex rant is my passion. Possibly because I have no emotional investment in the act so when it gets broken down into weird biology and mechanics by the cruel forces of physics, I find it kind of fascinating.

Sticking this below the cut because it will get long. My primary source is Packing for Mars by Mary Roach, but A City on Mars gets into the same issues. Yes, at least two books have entire chapters devoted to the space sex problem.

Note that this is all assuming microgravity. Many of the problems go away if you have artificial gravity, which we haven't cracked yet beyond building centrifuges. Your Star Trek fanfics are safe. So without further ado, and in no particular order, reasons why you probably shouldn't have sex in zero gravity and it probably wouldn't be that fun if you did:

The infamous 'no boners in space'. Since we're evolved to live in gravity, our bodies compensate for it by putting more effort into getting fluids above our heart. In microgravity, that's unnecessary, so you end up with fluid shift - more fluids, including blood, in the upper body. Your total blood volume also goes down. This would make an erection more difficult, and in fact most astronauts interviewed for whom this would be relevant claimed they didn't get any. The outlier here is Mike Mullane, but having read his memoir, he is the kind of guy who would lie about that. Now, as I touched on while despairingly liveblogging Barrayar, that does not prevent you from having a good time. However less blood flow would presumably mean less sensation in general for anyone below the belt. Or if you stimulated too much blood flow, with the lower total blood volume, perhaps that 'got dizzy because I got horny' joke will actually come true.

In microgravity, body heat and CO2 don't disperse the same way they do in regular atmosphere. Astronauts have to make sure they sleep in well-ventilated areas and are also trained on symptoms of CO2 poisoning. If multiple people are in an area exerting themselves, that buildup will happen faster and would need to be taken into account. It would be super embarrassing to suffocate crammed into a closet for some hanky panky.

The laws of motion are not your friend here. I've seen videos of astronauts pushing themselves across the room with a strand of hair. If you're trying to hold onto someone, you'd either want a relatively small space (maybe not a great idea, see point 2) or hold on really well. One astronaut Mary Roach interviewed suggested duct tape. Perhaps fuzzy handcuffs are critical here. Still you're going to need to put a lot of thought into every move you make.

Space is gross. :( Right now astronauts just wipe themselves down with clothes and dry shampoo. "Skin flakes" is a serious problem. Also we're still not entirely sure why, but astronauts develop awful body odor. According to Mary Roach again, while armpits are famous as a BO source, apparently the crotch is as well, it's just that those regions are typically further from our nose. So idk if anyone's going to want to get that close and personal with anyone else while they're up there. Then again I'm sure people have hooked up in grosser situations.

I'm probably forgetting some tidbits since I just woke up, but in summary, zero gravity sex would need to be carefully choreographed, require some equipment (fan, fasteners), and probably wouldn't even be as enjoyable as its Earthnorm counterpart. It's a good thing that's not what anyone's up there for.

#terrible space facts #does this count as nsfw? idk #talking about sex in a mostly clinical fashion

[alpaca-clouds]

Would Nuclear Energy ever be part of a Solarpunk society? Or rather, do you think that Nuclear Energy could ever be used in a Solarpunk society, without breaching into Atompunk?

Thank you for the question.

Now, let me prephase this with saying, that I am very pro-nuclear, due to my degree and due to having done an internship in a nuclear power plant 12 years ago. I think that the fear of nuclear desaster is greatly overblown, mostly because the worst case scenario is so scary, no matter how rare it is. Which is why many will prefer coal to nuclear, even though the scenario in which coal operates as intended is just as scary. But in a way that we have gotten used to.

However, there is the fact that for the construction of a nuclear power plant we need a lot of steel and concrete, two things that we currently cannot produce without emitting a lot of CO2. While most renewables also need both things, the amount needed is a lot less, even based on the amount of energy generation.

And, admittedly, there is also currently the issue of how the nuclear fuels are mined in often unsafe conditions for the workers and the environment and in some cases on indigenous land without the consent of the indigenous people in question and without them being compensated for it. Though other than the CO2 issue, those things could be regulated for better outcomes.

Even though, I do think that the quickest way to shift to entirely green energy would be to supplement a renewable grid with nuclear reactors. Ideally new nuclear reactors that meet modern safety standards. While nuclear is still always fairly safe, it is unconscionable that a lot of the reactors in use right now were once built for a twenty year useframe and are now at times going on to thirty or forty years.

The reason I am for an energy mix that includes nuclear is, that we right now have an issue with storing renewable energy. While this is a much smaller problem then fossile fuel cronies will make it out to be, we still do not have a reliable method to store large amounts of energy outside of using hydropower. Which means, that we do need a way to supplement renewable energies for those days when renewables do not create enough energy. Especially until we have build better energy grids. And I think that nuclear is good for that.

So, yes, I do think that nuclear has its place within Solarpunk, just not as a main energy source and rather a supplemental source of energy to help us shift.

Going into 70-80% nuclear instead of renewables (like France is doing) would be a mistake. But a 20-30% nuclear with 70-80% renewables energy mix should be a good solution.

Because I can guarantee you one thing: Nuclear is definitely safer than fossil fuels - even ignoring the entire climate change issue.

I hope that answers the question.

If any of you have any other question, feel free to send in an ask. You can find more information here.

#solarpunk #renewables #renewable energy #nuclear energy #nuclear #nuclear power #energy mix #answering asks #answering questions

[mcgnussen]

i can see that other people than me are surprised by kevin being vegan, so i’ve done some digging and found a danish article about it.

kevin actually went vegan in 2019. his biggest reason for it was to cut down his co2 footprint for environmental reasons. he admitted that he felt guilty about all the travelling he does, being a part of a sport that is hard to turn green, so he wanted to do something more to compensate. and he also believes that f1 should be one of the first motorsports to really lead the charge to becoming more green. in the article from 2019, you can really tell that he’s been thinking about ways the sport can become more green. his ideas are things we are already discussing and maybe has already been implemented, but he’s apparently been saying it for several years now and not many of us noticed. 

here’s the things he thinks f1 should do (and there might be more, again please remember this is from 2019):

plan the f1 calendar to minimise travelling

every drink and food sold at the f1 venues should come in recycled/recyclable containers 

the more co2 neutral a team can be out in their factories, the more money they should get from f1 

the tyres should be improved so they don’t have to go through as many sets during a race weekend (he even said he finds it insane how many tyres they use during a weekend!)

generally it’s not easy to find a lot about kevin’s diet or his views on the environment, which is a shame because it seems like he really has a lot of ideas and feelings about it. i need the f1 journalists to ask him about it. because he really is a guy to mostly talk about stuff when directly asked.

#kevin magnussen #haas f1 team #formula 1 #f1 #themagnussencorner

[asablehart]

Gastornis siderum

When she enters the chamber, its head swivels towards her, its iridescent comb swaying lazily. Every movement the bird makes is monumentous; with the bellow-like expansion of its chest, it seems to suck up all the air in the room, replacing it instead with something else: a weirder form of language she can just barely understand. Sometimes she pauses midway up the ladder, the pilot landing just a shadow above her, and places a hand beside the bird’s gill-like vents so she can feel their pulse.

Gastornis siderum is a species of space-dwelling birds that I’ve designed for an upcoming short story. These guys can grow up to 20ft tall and live in flocks with dozens of flockmates. They spend their lives flying from planet to planet, where they renew their food stores on high-altitude or fellow space-swelling fauna. Due to their advanced navigational capabilities, they’re used by humans to pilot ships through unknown regions of space. 

A circular cut reveals its brain, now hooked up to a series of nodes as familiar to her as her own fingers. Past the cliff of its fractured skull, she runs her finger down its skin and presses fingerprints into its soft flesh. She sees her reflection in the scale-like cap over its eyes; she thinks it would blink at her if it could. 

The cranial modifications had been made a long time ago. She doesn’t know how long they live for, so he doesn’t know how many pilots tended to this bird before her, before him.

Below the cut, I’ve discussed some of the physiological and behavioral traits they need to survive in space.

Main anatomical features:

Wing joints have multiple muscular attachments necessary for lung and gut mobility. This is to compensate for the lack of diaphragm and environmental pressure system.

Hollow bones, high body fat percentage, and air sacs reduce weight and therefore reduce the energy needed for propulsion. These features are more exaggerated in G. siderum than terrestrial birds due to the lack of gravitational pressure promoting bone growth.

Fat deposits (particularly on the neck and chest) are specialized for thermoregulation. Glucose-rich blood is shunted to the peripheries to prevent cell lysis due to freezing temperatures. The specific placement of fat and distribution of “anti-freeze-like” blood produces a distinct temperature gradient, from the warm thoracic cavity to the cold tail.

The cranial crop (located behind the keel) and caudal crop (located in the “tail”) are specialized food storage organs. The cranial crop holds fermenting food and is protected by a layer of insulation that allows for a temperature elevated above core body temperature. The caudal crop is more superficial and less protected, so food within it are closer to the temperature of the environment. Material can be swapped between the crops to either promote storage or fermentation.

Highly dependent on a symbiotic relationship with gut microflora, which ferment crop contents and produce CO2. G. siderum’s specialized mitochondria contain enzymes that hydrolyze CO2 into oxygen.

Fermentation products are used for propulsion via tail vents and for the synthesis of the pheromones necessary for communication and flock recognition.

The combination of a slow metabolism, low body temperature, and large food stores allows them to go for months without eating.

Main sensory features:

Complex eye that detects visible light from infrared radiation to ultraviolet radiation.

Like terrestrial birds, they have specialized cells in their eyes that detect magnetic poles, which is primarily useful for avoiding asteroids.

Nares located rostral to the first pair of eyes allows for complex analysis of gases, and can detect gases even in minute concentrations.

Theorized gravivestibular system may be an organ (or set of organs) that detects changes in gravitational pull from large distances.

Main behavioral features

Highly social animals with complicated social hierarchies which have yet to be studied to any significant degree.

The neck and tail are drawn close to the body for efficient thermoregulation and are rarely seen extended.

Flocks memorize routes between planets after only one flight.

G. siderum show significant preference to planets based on their atmospheric contents, with the highest affinity for O2 rich atmospheres and the second highest affinity for CO2 rich atmospheres. Despite being able to breathe CO2, O2 rich planets may yield a higher diversity of food.

Despite spending all of their time in space flying to their next planet, they spend as little time on these planets as possible, due to the discomfort associated with strong gravity. During flights, the majority of their energy is spent escaping the atmosphere of their last planet.

Pheromonal signals seem to be more complicated than other animals that communicate with scents. They may be able to analyze combinations of different gases (in specific ratios/concentrations) with the same organ that detects atmospheric gases.

Flocks fly in arrangements that optimize gas exchange. Gas depleted of CO2 may be used for propulsion and pheromone synthesis, if not breathing, and such gas can be shunted away from the lungs for these purposes.

Flockmates can regurgitate crop contents to share with others. Will vomit in self defense. Philanthropic behavior is consistently observed.

“Pilot birds” or “shamans” seem to have advanced navigational and sensory skills compared to other flockmates. Flocks will not produce another pilot bird while the current pilot bird lives, which implies the existence of a chemical signal which modifies the reproductive capabilities of the pilot’s flockmates. These are the birds captured for human space travel, however, due to the above reasons, it isn’t possible to breed pilots in captivity.

#my writing #my art #creature design #writeblr #artists on tumblr #science fiction #concept art #bird story #shorts

[cloudhiker-net]

Cloudhiker plants trees for you!

Cloudhiker already runs on servers powered by water energy. But there's more: I recently sponsored 100 trees for the Tree Nation Seeds game, and Cloudhiker is now part of their "Net Zero Website" program. This means all visits are counted and a tree is planted every now and then to compensate CO2 produced by the infrastructure that runs the internet and your home computer or smart phone.

I will also look into more options to contribute to a better future, and a green and healthy earth. 🌱 😊

Visit our "forest": tree-nation.com/profile/cloudhiker

#cloudhiker #greenearth

[echoesofdusk]

"artists are using so much energy and emitting so much CO2 by using glaze and nightshade, they are polluting so much"

ok so first of all, think. please think for a minute. why were glaze and nightshade developed to begin with? doesn't take a genius to figure it out, but if you need it spelled out, here you go

they were developed as a direct response to mass scraping and art being used without any permission whatsoever in AI models

in other words, artists wouldn't have to resort to using these if their art wasn't being scraped and used without permission or compensation of any kind

also, those AI models the art is fed to? also eat up a lot of energy! in fact, I'm sure they use up even more energy and emit even more CO2 than individual artists do!

so, if you go ahead and criticize artists for using up so much energy and emitting so much CO2 for using glaze and nightshade and say nothing about the big companies, then respectfully

you are full of shit

#hazy rambles #anti ai #anti gen ai #nightshade #glaze

[squigglywindy]

So…I’ve gotten a few requests for my infamous Hypovolemia Infodump, so it’s under the cut!

Disclaimer: This is not medical advice, this is Turture Blorbo Advice. But, I mean, if someone’s bleeding out and you remember something from this…I guess that’s a positive?

Most of my experience is purely hypothetical, I have a lot of textbook knowledge, but my actual hands-on shock experience is pretty small. So, take that as you will. Shock is one of my favorite subjects to study, which you can probably tell :D

Enjoy!

Hypovolemic shock is the shock that happens when too much of your blood falls out :)

So first! There’s three stages depending on how much blood you’ve lost:

1: About 15% (You’re probably feeling pretty okay)

2: 15-30% (The symptoms are setting in and you’re pretty out of it)

3: 30% and up (Oh no the shock is real)(but over 40% and you’re almost definitely toast. Gotta do something before you get to this point. That’s about a half gallon or two liters. Lotta blood)

The symptoms for each of the stages are going to be very similar, but they’ll get more and more intense as the blood loss increases (makes sense, right? No blood = bad)

Classic hypovolemia symptoms:

Tachycardia! Heart rate’s gonna speed up. It’s trying to compensate for the lack of blood, but there’s not blood, so if you feel the pulse it’s going to be really fast, but very weak. Thready, if you will.

Hyperventilation! Respiration rate is going to go up. This is because of distress, but also because of metabolic acidosis (which is a fancy way of saying your systemic pH is low, and your body compensates for this by blowing off CO2 by hyperventilating. That’s not really important, just know that you’ll breathe real fast)

Hypotension. Blood pressure drops. Makes sense - you’ve got less blood going through your blood vessels, so it can’t exert enough pressure. This is the big deal with shock - it’s like ‘the shock Thing’. The thing that needs treatment ASAP. With other types of shock, such as anaphylaxis (serious allergic reaction), this is done by injecting epinephrine, which causes blood pressure to spike, and all is well. That’s a story for another day, but consider: medicines that raise blood pressure will do absolutely nothing if there’s no blood to pressurize. So hypovolemic shock works a little different.

Pallor. Pale skin. Part of the pigmentation of skin can be attributed to the blood that lives underneath it, and when your blood falls out, so does your color. Whatever your natural skin tone is, it’ll go down a few notches.

Diaphoresis (I’m making you learn words, sorry). That’s a fancy way of saying sweat. This happens because your body’s releasing epinephrine in an effort to raise your blood pressure. It won’t work, but it’s trying, and epinephrine is the fight-or-flight hormone, which leads to…

Anxiety! This one’s fancy because yeah, it’s caused by the release of epinephrine, but also if you’re going into hypovolemic shock you’ve definitely been injured and are losing an obscene amount of blood, so who needs fancy hormones to feel anxiety?

Weakness. No blood, no strength - it’s pretty straightforward

Dizziness. Not enough blood to the brain = unsteady, the world will spin. Maybe they’ll fall; be ready to catch them. Actually, go ahead and set them down. You see blood, get them on the ground

Nausea, from all the crazy reactions from your body trying to keep you alive

Cold. Less blood means less warmth

And my personal favorite: CNS effects, such as confusion and agitation. If you don’t have enough blood, not enough blood can get to your brain. This results in brain malperfusion (not enough blood-flow) so it can’t work right and doesn’t know what’s going on. What’s more fun than helping someone who’s bleeding? Helping someone who’s bleeding and has no idea what’s going on!

In early stages, blood pressure may be normal and the symptoms mild; but as blood continues to drain, blood pressure drops, and symptoms increase. It’s a highly individualized experience.

So what do you do about it? Your friend’s laying there, they’ve been stabbed or sliced or fell off a building, and they’re bleeding. Maybe they have been; the shock’s already started. What now?

First and foremost! Stop the bleeding. Treating the symptoms of shock means nothing if the blood’s still falling out: they’re only going to get worse.

So, how to stop the bleeding.

For a smaller-scale injury, pressure. Pressure forever it is lovely. Noninvasive, doesn’t create secondary fallout, mash that injury into next Tuesday it’s gonna hurt but it’s worth it. Smoosh it. Mash it together and hold on tight.

So the pressure hasn’t worked. It’s too big, it’s bleeding too much, oh no. Perfect world? Stitches would be nice. But, depending on where it is and how it’s injured, they may or may not work. Whole artery got severed? Closing up the hole in the flesh isn’t gonna help a whole lot (hematoma, anyone? Bleeding under the skin) but it’s better than nothing until you can get to help.

Oh no, all else has failed? It’s tourniquet time. (Special side note that shouldn’t need to be said, but you never know. If you are bleeding from a head injury [and head injuries bleed a lot] then you’re just gonna have to suffer because you can’t tourniquet a neck. The ABCs are always priority. Airway, Breathing, Circulation. So yes, circulation is one of them and stopping the bleeding is number one, but you can’t sacrifice another ABC to save it. In this case, breathing). Tourniquets are fun because the angst potential is unreal. They can be made out of anything, which is where I get a lot of jollies. Very few people have a tourniquet laying around (I have one in my bag, but I never pretended to be normal), so they’re going to have to find something else. Any stray bit of cloth will do. A scarf. A really strong plant. Anything you can tie and make a loop out of. Wherever the wound is, put the tourniquet closer to the body. Slide something in the loop (stick, coathanger, a shoe, just not a body part) and twist that bad boy until it’s tight. Tighter than you think. Twist until you think “ah that’s too tight” and then twist a little bit more. And hold it. Actual tourniquets have a stick-holder, but if you makeshift it, you are the stick-holder. Now you need to write down what time it is, because when you get to help they’re going to want to know how long that tourniquet’s been tourniqueting.

The bleeding’s stopped, for better or worse. What else? (These can be done while stopping the bleeding, but remember: blood loss is priority)

Put the person in “the shock position”. Laying on their back, feet raised above their heart to help the remaining blood get to the parts that really matter (heart and brain, not legs)

If, and only if, you know that there’s not damage to their spinal cord, turn their head to the side (in case they throw up, this eliminates the risk for aspiration [fancy word for choking on inhaled fluids])

Put a blanket over them, if there is one. Helps keep them warm and conserve energy otherwise wasted by shivering

And of course, in any scenario where it’s remotely possible, the real priority is to call emergency responders and get help. Ideally, this can be done with one hand while controlling bleeding with the other. But if there’s no help to be had, do what you can

Always for any of the above, DO NOT MOVE THEM if you’re unsure if there’s spinal cord damage. Leave them still unless you know

So you held them together and now professional help has arrived. What’s next?

If the bleeding isn’t actually stopped, usually because a vessel’s been wrecked, they’re probably headed to surgery to get it sewed back up right

Tourniqueted limbs are usually sacrificed for the greater good and may get removed

But above all else, blood replacement. Transfusion is inevitable if you’ve lost enough blood to experience shock of any degree

Hydrate - you’ve lost a lot of fluid and hydration is never bad

That’s about it for hypovolemia. Enjoy harming the blorbos and making them bleed <3

#squiggles rambles #squiggles writes #squiggles says something educational #hypovolemia #hypovolemic shock #blood #obviously

[thoughtportal]

Canada’s explosive wildfires have damaged a forest carbon offset project

Scientists argue that it is a 'risky bet' to count on trees – temporary stores of carbon – to compensate for the carbon dioxide released by burning fossil fuels that stays in the atmosphere for centuries.

Canada’s explosive wildfire season has already pumped millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Some of that carbon is coming from vegetation burned at a carbon offset project, highlighting the fragility of a tool the world is relying on to fight catastrophic climate change.

With Canada facing what’s on track to be its worst wildfire season on record – and climate change fueling ever more destructive blazes – climate experts and offset developers are concerned it could be a harbinger of what’s to come.

On June 3, British Columbia fire officials spotted a blaze that has impacted the BigCoast Forest Climate Initiative project, according to Domenico Iannidinardo, senior vice president for forests and climate at Mosaic Forest Management Corporation, which runs the project.

“About 100 hectares of our 40,000 hectare project was involved in this fire,” or about 0.25% of the project, Iannidinardo told Bloomberg Green. That’s an area equivalent to roughly 140 football pitches worth of forest.

So far, little is known about how the fire will impact BigCoast’s carbon removal capacity or how much carbon has been released. Werner Kurz, senior research scientist in the Canadian Forest Service, said its emissions could be up to 32,250 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, depending on the fire’s severity. The impact is “clearly not trivial” for BigCoast or the local area, he said, but it’s a “rounding error” in terms of the climate impact of the wildfires that have ravaged the province.

As of June 23, crews had suppressed the fire so it was no longer spreading. Mosaic said that assessing the emissions from the area that was burned “will take some time.” They will be incorporated into future carbon accounting and be independently verified. Still, Iannidinardo described the “disturbance” as “negligible.”

Companies and countries are increasingly relying on carbon offsets to reach their emissions targets, a tool used in an attempt to compensate for their climate pollution by investing in projects that reduce or remove emissions elsewhere. But climate scientists and activists say the instruments, including those based on forests, aren’t generally effective at mitigating climate change, despite decades of experimentation and improvement. They point to forest fires – which are increasing in severity partly due to climate change – as a big reason. Grayson Badgley, research scientist at CarbonPlan, a U.S.-based nonprofit​, said it’s a “risky bet” to count on trees – temporary stores of carbon – to compensate for the carbon dioxide released by burning fossil fuels that stays in the atmosphere for centuries.

In 2018, Mosaic, a logging company, and its partners committed to stop cutting down trees in the project area and instead protect them for 30 years. The company is measuring the tons of additional CO2 stored and the forestry-related emissions avoided, and packaging each of those as a carbon credit for sale to companies or individuals looking to offset their carbon footprint. Each credit represents one ton of CO2 removed or not added to the atmosphere.

The project has already issued 1.4 million credits, an amount equivalent to the total emissions of Sierra Leone in 2021. They’ve been bought by U.K.-based AI company Dataiku, global insurance firm Aspen and the American Institute for Foreign Study, a travel and insurance company, among others, according to Bloomberg Green analysis of public data. There’s currently no information to indicate any of those companies’ credits have been impacted by this year’s fire.

Under the rules of the offset registry Verra, whose standard Mosaic uses, the company has 30 days to report any damage to its forests and up to two years to submit a “loss report” detailing its impact. As a type of insurance mechanism against wildfires and other risks, project developers must contribute a portion of their credits to what’s known as a buffer pool. If disaster strikes and impacts a project’s carbon inventory, the standard states that an equivalent number of credits are taken out of the pool.

BigCoast’s buffer pool is 15.5% of its issued credits, Mosaic said. But none of these are earmarked for natural risks like extreme weather, pest outbreaks and fire, according to project documentation. That’s because the company evaluates that risk – calculated according to a matrix of significance and likelihood – to be zero.

That assessment is “mind-boggling,” said William Anderegg, director of the Wilkes Center for Climate Science and Policy at the University of Utah. Fires are a “really dramatic risk” that forest offset projects face, he said, along with other risks such as drought stress and insect outbreaks.

Mosaic said its risk assessment is based on the fact that “the project is geographically and ecologically diverse and distributed,” meaning the likelihood of widespread damage due to fires or something else measures as “insignificant.”

Under Verra’s rules, credits allocated against other risks can backstop a fire incident, but in the long run this could have a serious impact on the insurance efficacy, Anderegg said. If wildfires eat up more than was budgeted, that has “very real impacts on whether these projects are likely to succeed over a century,” he said.

A team of researchers led by Barbara Haya at the University of California at Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy recently identified a set of shortcomings in carbon offset registry methods, like those used by BigCoast, that could “critically undermine” their buffer pool policies. None take into account how climate change may increase fire risk, for example. In the U.S., CarbonPlan’s Badgley and a team of researchers found California’s buffer pool to be “severely undercapitalized.”

Verra relies on “the historical likelihood of an event occurring” to guide its buffer pool policies, said company spokesperson Joel Finkelstein. The company is set to update its insurance tool later in the summer to better account for changing risks due to climate change.

Canadian offset developers across the country are nervous about the rest of the fire season. “This is a wake-up call,” said André Gravel, chief executive of Société de gestion d’actifs forestiers (Solifor), which runs the Monet Forest Conservation Project. “The frequency of fires is increasing,” he said.

“Everyone is very concerned and on high alert,” said Adrian Leslie, manager of a Nature Conservancy of Canada forestry offsets project called Darkwoods in British Columbia. The group said approximately 4,485 hectares of the project burned in 2021, or less than 10% of the total area. That equates to about 36,700 tonnes of CO2 being released, according to a preliminary estimate shared by Leslie.

“The IPCC has made it very clear that every ton matters, every year matters, every degree matters,” Kurz said. Wildfire risk is increasing and project developers must recognize and address this: “We have to bend the curve.”

Bloomberg’s Demetrios Pogkas contributed to this report.

#forest carbon offset project #canada #carbon offset #climate crisis #climate science #climate change #forest fire #article #Monet Forest Conservation Project #canadian wildfires

[elasgottoomuchfreetime]

CO2 is good for plants, they need it to make O2, so more CO2 is good.

…dude, if we have more CO2 that also means we need more plants to compensate. Like how the hell do they think a plant works, they also have limited capacity.

#creating more CO2 while yeeting the rainforest is therefore not a good idea #isn’t that common sense? #or am I missing something? #plants #co2 #never seen a plant die of a lack of CO2 #photosynthesis #climate change

[regardingjenmish]

I know it's ridiculous but i hope he at least compensates for the CO2 emissions..

I'm gonna be honest rn and tell you that i have no fucking clue what topic this is about hfjsla but I'm assuming I said something and forgot about it which is not a shocker

#anonymous #i sometimes post shit and then log off and then hours later i have a message about a topic i no longer know what its about #so my bad fjksla

[supergirafe]

Pollution numérique : sommes-nous à blâmer ?

À l'ère du tout numérique, notre dépendance croissante à la technologie s'accompagne d'une pollution invisible mais bien réelle pour notre planète. Pourtant, en faire porter la culpabilité au citoyen moyen est simpliste. 

Bien sûr, nous sommes tous responsables de nos choix en tant qu’individus. Mais on peut aussi voir les choses sous un autre angle et considérer nos usages du numérique comme le résultat d'un phénomène orchestré par le modèle économique dominant et les grandes entreprises. En effet, ces derniers nous maintiennent dans le mensonge quant aux véritables impacts de l'usage du numérique, et ce, dès la petite enfance.

L’ignorance programmée, ou les enjeux de l’éducation numérique

Ainsi, la transition du papier à l’ordinateur nous est souvent présentée comme une démarche écologique. Sous prétexte de sauver des arbres, il n'est pas rare de voir des écoles, lieux de formation des citoyens du futur, fournir des ordinateurs aux élèves et favoriser des plateformes comme Google Classroom pour la réalisation des activités d’apprentissages. Parallèlement, le nombre de photocopies autorisées aux enseignants et enseignantes est limité. 

Cette année, avec mes élèves, nous avons estimé les rejets annuels de CO2 de l’usage du numérique du Lycée français de Taipei : environ 48 000 kgCO2, pour une école d’environ 250 élèves. Si on considère qu’un arbre adulte absorbe 25 kgCO2 par an, il faudrait donc planter plus de 1900 arbres dans la cour de l’école pour compenser ces émissions, ce qui est physiquement impossible. En comparaison, un seul arbre produit jusqu’à 8333 feuilles de papier, donc si un élève du secondaire utilise en moyenne 2188 feuilles par année, seulement 65 arbres par année seraient nécessaires pour toute l’école.

Les grandes entreprises technologiques ont tout intérêt à faire croire qu'en ayant recours au numérique, on préserve des arbres, l’emblème de la lutte écologique, alors qu'en réalité il s'agit d'une ressource renouvelable et que nous possédons les modèles forestiers adéquats pour en faire une gestion efficace. De plus, ces grandes corporations s’assurent de garder sous silence le besoin d'autres ressources, comme les métaux rares, dont l’extraction est extrêmement dommageable, pour la fabrication des composants informatiques et des centres de stockage des données.

Actuellement, les programmes éducatifs actuels laissent peu de possibilités aux enseignants et enseignantes d’aborder ces enjeux avec les élèves. Même les plus conscients se retrouvent confrontés à la contradiction de devoir utiliser les outils numériques imposés par la direction scolaire ou les directives de l'éducation nationale.

Que remettre en question ?

Il serait donc pertinent d’élargir nos discussions quant à la pollution numérique et de l’aborder de manière plus holistique. Cela implique certes de considérer la responsabilité individuelle du citoyen, mais aussi d’aborder de front ce qui ne dépend pas de lui mais d'entités auxquelles nous accordons beaucoup de confiance, telle l’école et les grandes entreprises numériques. Cela permettrait d’ailleurs d’ouvrir une réflexion plus large sur l’infiltration par les intérêts privés du système éducatif et de la lutte pour l’environnement. Sources

ECOTREE, 2024. Combien de CO2 absorbe un arbre ? Repéré au https://ecotree.green/combien-de-co2-absorbe-un-arbre

GREENPEACE, 2024. La pollution numérique, qu’est-ce que c’est ? Repéré au https://www.greenpeace.fr/la-pollution-numerique/

KEUNIGS, A. et GEISSMANN, L. Le papier, la planète et nous. Bruxelles environnement, Institut bruxellois pour la gestion de l’environnement, 72 p. Repéré au https://www.transition-durable.eu/uploads/fichiers/outils/eleve.pdf 

RADIO-CANADA, 2016. Planter des arbres pour compenser sa consommation de papier. Repéré au https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/797105/plantation-arbres-ipe-commerces-charlottetown-environnement 

[toutmontbeliard-com]

Aéroport Dole-Jura : des défenseurs de la nature saisissent la justice en vue du retrait de l’autorisation d'exploitation

Serre Vivante, association de protection de la nature, a déposé auprès du Tribunal Administratif de Besançon une requête à l'encontre de la décision de la Direction de la Sécurité de l'Aviation Civile Nord Est autorisant la société EDEIS à exploiter l'aérodrome de Dole-Jura à Tavaux (39-Jura) : "Ce document n’aurait jamais du être validé au regard de la situation de la piste, par respect pour les usagers du service proposé. Si la planète absorbe une grande quantité de CO2, principalement via les forêts et les océans, cela ne permet plus depuis plusieurs décennies déjà de compenser les gaz à effet de serre émis par les activités humaines qui déséquilibrent le cycle naturel du carbone… L’emballement du changement climatique, l’inaction malgré les alertes de nos scientifiques, font qu’il est sans doute bientôt trop tard pour organiser la transition et qu’il devient urgent de bifurquer. Prendre l’avion est l’une des activités les plus polluantes : les émissions d’un seul vol, pour un passager, dépassent ce qu’émet une majorité d’humains en un an, toutes activités confondues. Voler n’est pas compatible avec un mode de vie bas carbone. Beaucoup de nos décideurs publics cherchent (encore) à (se) convaincre de la prétendue nécessitée de développer la desserte aéronautique d’une région qu’ils considèrent comme « enclavée ». Le ton est donné : la desserte aérienne de la petite ville de Dole est considérée comme "vitale". En quoi les liaisons aériennes opérées depuis Tavaux, essentiellement vers Porto ou Marrakech, seraient-elles indispensables au développement économique et à la création d’emplois en Bourgogne Franche-Comté ? L’absence de desserte aérienne compromettrait la compétitivité des entreprises qui y sont installées ? C’est oublier qu’à part les îliens, tous les habitants de France métropolitaine ont un accès direct à l’ensemble du réseau routier national dont la longueur totale dépasse le million de kilomètres et, via ce réseau, aux autres modes de transport, ferroviaires et aériens. La densité du réseau routier français qui atteint près de 2 km de route par km2, est supérieure à celle de l’Allemagne, de l’Espagne, de l’Italie ou du Royaume-Uni. Plus de 93% de la population se trouve à moins de deux heures d’un aéroport connecté à au moins un hub intercontinental : à l’heure du TGV et du réchauffement climatique, peut-on raisonnablement vouloir un aéroport à sa porte, pour tout le monde ? Face à l’urgence climatique et à l’érosion sans précédent de la biodiversité du fait des activités humaines, il revient aux associations de protection de la nature et de l’environnement d’assumer leur responsabilité de lanceurs d’alertes pour tenter de préserver la santé et les conditions de vie de tous". Read the full article

[esgjuly]

The Benefits of Net Zero for Unlocking Corporate Development

To help you as Net Zero consultancy, when all greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere are matched by their removal, a state known as net zero emissions occurs, meaning there are no net emissions overall. Using techniques based on nature (trees and forests, carbon sequestration, afforestation, and reforestation) and technology (direct air capture, carbon capture and storage (CCS), and electrochemical) to capture or eliminate an equivalent volume of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, this approach aims to reduce emissions as much as possible while offsetting the remaining emissions. By drastically lowering the environmental impact of human activity, the overall goal of reaching net zero is essential to halting climate change.

We are a Net Zero, the goal of net zero is to balance out the whole amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs) resulting from human activity. These include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, and sulfur dioxide emissions. Reducing emissions usually follows a set course, such as the 1.5°C (34.7°F) objective. GHGs from the atmosphere are sequestered to offset any leftover emissions. To achieve carbon neutrality, GHG emissions must be offset frequently by a wider variety of initiatives, including advancing a circular economy and increasing energy efficiency, which includes avoiding emissions. With its less strict reporting bounds and lack of prescription for a precise reduction trajectory.

Being a Net zero Consultant, the term "net zero" has probably come up in several energy and climate change conversations. However, did you know that this term has applications in various areas and businesses, not just one? It finds application in scientific research, economic strategy, energy planning, and environmental advocacy and policymaking. Adopting a net zero strategy aligns with changing customer tastes for sustainability, provides chances for market uniqueness, reduces costs through effective operations, and draws in funding from stakeholders looking to engage in eco-friendly activities. Adopting net zero strategies includes switching to renewable energy sources like wind and solar power, optimizing resource use for increased effectiveness, cost savings, and better project outcomes.

In our role as Net Zero Carbon, Scientific research plays a crucial role in influencing policies and promoting advancements that ease the global transition towards a net zero-emission society. It utilizes the net zero concept to develop novel technologies, create carbon capture techniques, and expand knowledge in environmental sciences. To achieve net zero emissions, two steps must be taken. This two-pronged approach begins with reducing emissions created by humans, particularly those from fossil fuel-powered cars and industrial processes, to almost zero. Consequently, any leftover emissions require a compensating balance that is reached using carbon removal techniques. This can be achieved by actively removing carbon from the atmosphere through natural reforestation or cutting-edge technology like Direct Air Capture and Storage (DACS).

As one of the leading Net Zero consultancy, A crucial first step in this strategy is refocusing on renewable energy sources, such as geothermal, hydroelectric, solar, and wind power. In addition to offering lower greenhouse gas emissions, these sustainable options are essential in guiding the world's transition to a net zero future. Reaching net zero can significantly boost energy security and resilience. Net-zero solutions minimize carbon emissions while promoting a region's resilience and security by diversifying energy sources and decreasing reliance on fossil fuels. Energy diversification is the process of incorporating multiple energy sources into a system. Diversifying their energy mix can help regions become more robust to supply disruptions, price shocks, and carbon emissions.

#netzerocarbon #netzeroconsultancy #netzero #netzeroconsultant