this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
550 points (94.8% liked)

Europe

8484 readers
3 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Ί

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Just 1% of people are responsible for half of all toxic emissions from flying.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Veraxus@kbin.social 54 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You could also just tax those things at rates the super-rich will actually feel in their bank accounts.

[–] Vivarevo@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 year ago

Progressive tax based on income, jet type and frequency.

[–] SHITPOSTING_ACCOUNT@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or just a rate sufficient to remove and sequester 2x the amount.

Or require them to use 100% sustainable fuel to accelerate the development of such fuels.

[–] twopi@lemmy.ca 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Carbon sequestration is not possible right now or even for the foreseeable future.

Forcing jets to use renewable resources is a good one be should aim to ban private short and medium haul flights in general.

[–] muix@infosec.pub 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Are trees not sufficient for carbon sequestration?

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

In order to actually sequester carbon from trees you then need to cut them down and use or burry the lumber in a place where it will rest for the rest of time. Besides we would need vastly more space, water, and firefighting to even approach real offsets. Trees are nice for shade and some ecosystems but they don’t really have anything to do with climate change beyond burning up faster.

[–] n00b001@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Think of the carbon life cycle.

There's hydrocarbons underground that have been there for millions of years. Used to be in the air, but now it's not.

Now it's burned as jet fuel (releasing that cow back into the air)

If trees pull that co2 info their wood, what happens to that wood in 10,000 years? It's going to be in the atmosphere again (bacteria and fungi break down dead wood)

So the only way to do it, using trees, would be to burry them after maturation and make sure they don't rot. And you'd need to do this to capture the gigs tonnes of co2 that is released (that's a lot of trees...and a lot of digging...)

[–] Meowoem@sh.itjust.works -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not possible? It's happening in various places already

[–] twopi@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Can you provide examples?

I have seen big contraptions that promise it but aren't actually doing it.