Follow

Is it me, or is there something very suspicious about claiming to fully offset emissions by planting trees?

I mean, if we magically had the resources, or the will, to plant as many as are necessary to offset all of our emissions, tomorrow, would the atmosphere behave exactly as if we committed collective suicide and stopped polluting altogether?

Trees take years to grow. Planting trees requires garden centres, watering, warehouses, transportation, machinery. Trees interact with the atmosphere and with their ecosystems in various ways. If a tree wasn't growing there in the first place, and the area isn't altered by humans, almost by definition there should be no tree there.

Besides all that, offsetting by planting trees seems a useful distraction and a heart-warming falsehood.

I'm not saying we should not reforest where we previously deforested, or even in new places if careful study advises to do so. But this image of new trees sprouting on the other side of the world to make up for all the pollution and the disruption we cause over here is a marketing scam.

@tripu I agree. My understanding is that indeed reforestation should happen but it's no way near a solution.

This is up there with "carbon capture technology" as a distraction maneuver, deployed as part of greenwashing campaigns.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.