Like crypto or gamestop or something. What's the next one of those? Anybody know?

    • bubbalu [they/them]
      ·
      3 年前

      there's still some decomposition happening in the ocean and wood is pretty bouyant so it probably wouldn't get deep enough to get to the bottom where there isn't much microbial activity; substantially more of it would still be released into the atmosphere than it would be down a deep hole.

      • medium_adult_son [he/him]
        ·
        3 年前

        That makes sense, thanks.

        I worry that if a deep hole is dug, people would be tempted to start throwing all sorts of stuff down there.

        • bubbalu [they/them]
          ·
          3 年前

          could be a really dynamic start to a cargo cult. your spiritual worth or luck determined by the most cherished thing you can bring yourself to sacrifice to hole.

    • D61 [any]
      ·
      edit-2
      3 年前

      Damn, my "joke" hath biteth me in the arse.

      serious face :monke-ruserious:

      Okay, well, no. First, the carbon released from the rotten wood would both contribute to ocean acidification as well as making its way back to the surface and then back into the carbon cycle.

      The idea is to actually return an equal amount of carbon to the earth that fossil fuel extraction has removed in a way that keeps it there for centuries. Hopefully removing it from the surface level carbon cycle.

      • medium_adult_son [he/him]
        ·
        3 年前

        That it would contribute to ocean acidification makes sense. I thought water slowed decomposition, but I was misremembering that logs in swamps, so mud, would decompose a lot slower.

        Thanks!

        • D61 [any]
          ·
          3 年前

          Technically, if we were to bind the logs together with weights to have negative boyancy and dump them into something like the Mariana trench the lack of heat, sunlight, and a fair bit of microbial action should drastically slow decomposition. Especially if they are treated/coated with something. Its why we can still find old wooden plank ships at the bottom of the ocean.

          But I'd imagine that the amount of trees we'd need to dump into the ocean to try to lock away the extra carbon in the atmosphere might (and I say might because I'm not in any way qualified to speak with authority about this) be such an terrifyingly huge amount that the lower rate of decay wouldn't matter due to the sheer volume that we would need to be storing in the ocean. (Not even accounting for accidents or failures of our systems that wound up with the trees breaking free and floating back up to the surface.