WaPO this morning: Carbon sequestration by burying wood?

I realize that this is behind a Washington Post paywall but what appears publically should be enough to raise some questions:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2024/09/26/carbon-atmosphere-burying-wood/

Intriguing. But my first concern is the carbon footprint of transporting the logs to the burial site and of operating the bulldozer or excavator. And such equipment usually involve air polluting engines, especially outside the few countries who demand tighter emission controls. (And one must include the carbon and pollution issues all the way back to the petroleum-producing field which produced the gasoline or diesel used in these “sequestration” operations.)

I want to see the math on this to see if it really is a potentially viable solution. I am very very skeptical. (Of course, I have no professional scientific expertise in the relevant fields so my opinion doesn’t mean much. So I’m open to instruction on this.)

1 Like

I propose we solve the growing carbon problem by launching those dead tree trunks into space so that the sun’s gravity will become our ultimate “carbon capture” solution. Yeah, I think I could get a big Washington Post feature article out of that.

1 Like

It might be easier to just leave the coal and crude oil in the ground where they are already buried.

5 Likes

Yep. Completely leave out the middle man.

1 Like

Running a distant second (or maybe Also Ran), fill up existing mines and quarries. It’s still seems barely credible to justify the energy cost of moving that much wood.

Or this, which might(?) be done as part of farming.

Carbon dioxide sequestration through silicate degradation and carbon mineralisation: promises and uncertainties

Cliched “The Office” catchphrase goes here.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.