This is a valid concern/factor to take into account, but this can be done in a cost/benefit analysis framework. Almost any (maybe actually any?) action we take will involve some energy/resource input, but some of them will still have net positive impacts when we take that into account. For instance, we’d need to have an upfront energy/resource input to build any energy production device (solar panel, wind turbine, nuclear power plant, etc.), but in the long run these can produce more usable energy than the initial input. So I think the answer is probably that this approach might be appropriate in some situations where the math says it is a net gain, but there are probably many situations where the benefits wouldn’t be worth the costs.
cthawley
11
Related topics
| Topic | Replies | Views | Activity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| California/Australia Fires, and their roots in Climate Change, Land Management, and Ecosystem Collapse | 98 | 4497 | January 22, 2020 | |
| Vegetation management for fire safety during restoration of forest margin | 40 | 1573 | January 27, 2020 | |
| The Unseriousness of Industrial Carbon Capture Plants | 41 | 2226 | June 18, 2024 | |
| Mycelial networks and the "mushroom ball" carbon sink . Plausible? | 73 | 4601 | June 3, 2021 | |
| Plant thrown out by neighbor, now established. Wild or no? | 39 | 2038 | March 1, 2020 |