[HACC] CO2 Sequestration in Forests

[Kolossos]

Hello Lars,
it's more space efficient to use Photovoltaic to reduce carbon emissions
than to plant trees. (I know, cost efficiency is something different.
And the amazonas has an area of 6 Mio km².)

So I "do the math" and calculated the area of PV that we are necessary
to produce the power for 36c3
over the time of one year, this are 500m².

I draw the necessary area on a map on the place of the roof top of Halle 2:
http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/de/map/compensate-35c3-electrical-power-with-pv_283245

There are also some comments to my calculation on the right side of the
map.

In the moment the top priority is to cut carbon emissions down. In the
future we should have technologies to get
CO2 out of the atmosphere. To develop such technologies time is
necessary, so we should start now, but again we have to rapidly grow the
usage of wind and solar and have to work on storage to cut carbon
emissions.
 
Best regards
Tim


Am 14.01.19 um 22:21 schrieb Lars:
> Hi, 
>
> we were just discussing here (locally) how one could "pay up" for its
> CO2 (or generally climate-related) resource usage. I am not that much
> convinced of these programs where you could buy yourself off, for
> example where you pay a sum per kilometre of air travel. For a start,
> the prices seem to be ridiculously low (see source below) but also the
> type of projects supported in these projects — to me — sound a little
> bit whitewashed.
>
> Whether it is building solar power or educating children, a) none of the
> projects is actually scrubbing any CO2 from the athmosphere, b) it seems
> not to be considered, that the projects themselves have to be build and
> consume resources themselves, and finally c) especially the education
> programs are only bad disguises for shoving the problem towards future
> generations. More in the sense of: hey, I do not want to restrict
> myself, but let me support you (my future children) in getting rid of
> all the waste I produced. 
>
> Towards the sources, german wikipedia [1] links a study of the german
> government, which sets the amount of damage per ton of CO2 at 180,-€
> [2]. A quick glimpse at one of this "climate compensation" websites
> comes up with a price of roughly 20€ pre ton. 
>
> Now, I was thinking along the lines, what would be a sensible
> requirement for an acceptable way of compensating for the damage
> inflicted, or maybe "resources used" to phrase it less aggressively? I
> think, if you try to not lie to yourself, you have to chose methods that
> actually remove the given amount of CO2 out of the athmosphere,
> additionally to the current state. Thus, although generally positive,
> simple conservation of forrest will not cut it. And educating children
> is not even fulfilling this fundamental requirement. But then, what is
> left?
>
> I found Tocchi 2018 [3], a paper where the CO2 reduction (by sequestration,
> i.e. binding of CO2 in (plant) matter) is calculated based on the mass
> of trees. By rule of thumb this would mean that you would have to pay
> for on year of an acre (~4k m²) of maple-beech-birch forest — which is 
> at least growing for 25 years for a single flight from Frankfurt to 
> New York. By above requirement, you would have to establish this forest 
> in an area that had little or no CO2 storage before (for example one 
> of the parking strips of a large mall).
>
> Thus, how much would it cost to compensate for — in the sense of covering
> the damages inflicted by — the 36c3? Without running the numbers I very
> much assume that re-foresting the area of Leipzig Messe would not cover
> much of the carbon footprint of the congress. Aside from the problems
> arising from the deconstruction — finding a new venue for the 37c3
> probably would be one of the smaller problems afterwards.
>
> But, would it be helpful to state the scale of the challenge for a
> climate-positive Congress in this way? 
>
> Regards,
>     Lars
>
> References:
> [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/CO2-Preis (german) [2019-01-14]
> [2] https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/hohe-kosten-durch-unterlassenen-umweltschutz [Nov 2018]
> [3] Toochi EC. Carbon sequestration: how much can forestry sequester CO2?. Forest Res Eng Int J. 2018;2(3):148‒150.
> DOI: 10.15406/freij.2018.02.00040 https://medcraveonline.com/FREIJ/FREIJ-02-00040.pdf
>