In my interview with Justin Sutton, the award-winning inventor of the
Interstate Traveler Hydrogen Superhighway spoke at length about reforestation
and the vast quantities of carbon which can be sequestered and desertification
which can be reversed through reforestation. He also explained how much energy
efficiency stands to be gained by supplementing and ultimately replacing
outmoded high-tension electrical transmission lines and towers with the
superconducting conduit which runs through the heart of his high-speed rail
system.
Since energy efficiency and reforestation are touted in the environmental
community as the best means of reversing the global climate crisis, which is
better? Well, that's a trick question because we can and must embrace both
approaches because they most certainly are not exclusive of one another.
However, enquiring minds are left with the question of out-and-out superiority.
My expert opinion is that neither is better because each carries ancillary
benefits. Nevertheless, if you wish to choose one as the main method you
support, reforestation would be a most worthy selection.
Forests perform many vital functions in nature over and above the sequestration
of carbon. They help shatter damaging wind patterns. They help regulate rain patterns.
They provide important habitat. They help rivers and streams remain healthy
environments for fish and other aquatic wildlife.
Energy efficiency, of course, helps everyone use less energy, which reduces
pollution, reduces utility bills, reduces pressures on real estate and
environmentally sensitive lands for the siting of new power plants and helps
people learn about the environmental consequences of living with modern
conveniences and amenities.
In the end, then, we can see that energy efficiency and reforestation come with
ancillary benefits but both need an army of grassroots advocates. You'll be
welcome in either camp or both.
Fomenting the Triple Bottom Line
Corbett Kroehler
In my interview with Justin Sutton, the award-winning inventor of the Interstate Traveler Hydrogen Superhighway spoke at length about reforestation and the vast quantities of carbon which can be sequestered and desertification which can be reversed through reforestation. He also explained how much energy efficiency stands to be gained by supplementing and ultimately replacing outmoded high-tension electrical transmission lines and towers with the superconducting conduit which runs through the heart of his high-speed rail system.
Since energy efficiency and reforestation are touted in the environmental community as the best means of reversing the global climate crisis, which is better? Well, that's a trick question because we can and must embrace both approaches because they most certainly are not exclusive of one another. However, enquiring minds are left with the question of out-and-out superiority.
My expert opinion is that neither is better because each carries ancillary benefits. Nevertheless, if you wish to choose one as the main method you support, reforestation would be a most worthy selection.
Forests perform many vital functions in nature over and above the sequestration of carbon. They help shatter damaging wind patterns. They help regulate rain patterns. They provide important habitat. They help rivers and streams remain healthy environments for fish and other aquatic wildlife.
Energy efficiency, of course, helps everyone use less energy, which reduces pollution, reduces utility bills, reduces pressures on real estate and environmentally sensitive lands for the siting of new power plants and helps people learn about the environmental consequences of living with modern conveniences and amenities.
In the end, then, we can see that energy efficiency and reforestation come with ancillary benefits but both need an army of grassroots advocates. You'll be welcome in either camp or both.
Fomenting the Triple Bottom Line
Corbett Kroehler