The most effective, available and scalable #carbon #capture technology is reforesting our planet. There are practically no downsides to this. #Restoration could become a driver for a new kind of eco-nomic growth. Imagine a tax-funded initiative to massively deploy forestry programs. This would be a jobs programme as well. Give people housing in the newly reforested areas so they can maintain them. Combine agro-forestry and permaculture techniques to feed the local populations and restore biodiversity. Make it possible for people currently in bullshit jobs or carbon-intensive jobs to retrain to this new system. It is possible. We have the means.
This is what we NEED and can demand. Any future socialist programme needs to be built around the idea of #restoration. Of habitats, of colonialisms, of patriarchisms, of inequality.
We have to refute any attempt by #techbros and corporations to squander public funds on 'carbon capture technology' and instead insist on ecological carbon capture approaches.
Here is an example how to do it the wrong way: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/07/the-wrong-kind-of-trees-irelands-afforestation-meets-resistance
Let's analyze what is happening here:
The forests in question are commercial monocultures that are not indigineous to the area. If we want this to succeed we need to #decolonize these processes, priviledging what is native to an area and making sure local communities have a say and have ownership of the process. Maybe its not the fastest grower or most economical choice. The point is #restoration of large scale local ecosystems. Restoration of historical landscapes. If there is some sustainable industry happening in the margins that is ok, but not the main driver.
Couldn't have said it better myself. ☮️
Techbros will soon realize they all share a largest blind spot in the equation, and it will be both sad and funny.
@mango Yes, that's the point. Basically, sustainable reforestation would mean: take some piece of land and stop doing anything with it. Period ...
Trees live for a long time and when they die not all the carbon is released. A good amount is sequestered into the soil. If we har est trees for 'back to eden gardening' type of soil building we can bind good amounts of carbon in the soil, while making it more fertile and erosion resistant at the same time.
Afforestation is a good idea where humans have destroyed forests, but I don't like the way it gets incorporated into "carbon trading" markets. (I think this isn't what you're advocating, but I think it's an important thing to keep in mind).
I don't think it's really possible to "offset" the damage done by burning fossil fuels by planting a forest somewhere. Most ecosystems tend toward steady state, and most forests only sequester carbon until they reach it.
@mango id read a story about a project where NYC hauled sewage by rail out to West Texas. It was processed through a centrifuge to extract water and heavy metals first before shipping. After 10 years deer had returned to the area
Sunbeam City is a Libertarian Socialist solarpunk instance. It is ran democratically by a cooperative of like-minded individuals.