We need a cheap fast way to turn vacant or underutilized commercial property into carbon sinks.
Like some way to fill up an empty parking lot at an empty office park or strip mall with portable self-watering containers that contain something like grass or bamboo or de-THC hemp.
No need to re-zone anything, just roll up with it while the land is not being used, soak up some carbon, and then move on if the land gets used again.
There are occasional stories of this tone for different kinds of terrain: boreal forest, savannah, woodlands, wetlands and so on. Do any firms do work to match existing planning bodies for optimal wilderness land use with all of the current cutting-edge findings or do they stay locked inside the science reporting bubble?
They stay locked in the science reporting bubble. The only real reason this was funded (IMO) is because it also has multi-faceted potential to increase arable land, treat air and water pollution, create habitat for aquatic creatures, and improve farming output. Implementing it is a whole different ball game financially than a proof of concept though.
We need a cheap fast way to turn vacant or underutilized commercial property into carbon sinks.
Like some way to fill up an empty parking lot at an empty office park or strip mall with portable self-watering containers that contain something like grass or bamboo or de-THC hemp.
No need to re-zone anything, just roll up with it while the land is not being used, soak up some carbon, and then move on if the land gets used again.
Sounds solarpunk, I’m in.
Water Hyacinths have been used for sewage treatment for quite some time [1].
[1]https://www.spacefoundation.org/space_technology_hal/sewage-...
There are occasional stories of this tone for different kinds of terrain: boreal forest, savannah, woodlands, wetlands and so on. Do any firms do work to match existing planning bodies for optimal wilderness land use with all of the current cutting-edge findings or do they stay locked inside the science reporting bubble?
They stay locked in the science reporting bubble. The only real reason this was funded (IMO) is because it also has multi-faceted potential to increase arable land, treat air and water pollution, create habitat for aquatic creatures, and improve farming output. Implementing it is a whole different ball game financially than a proof of concept though.
It feels like this should have been obvious a century or few ago. Marsh gas and sewer gas have been things for millennia.
Mesopotamian Marshes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesopotamian_Marshes :
> 4th millennium BCE
> Biome: flooded grasslands and savannas
(edit)
Modern agricultural irrigation is draining aquifers.
Aeroponics is a form of hydroponics that uses less water.
Aeroponics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroponics
How extensive were hydrological agricultural practices in the ancient Americas?
"Prehistoric Maize in Southeastern Virginia" (1965) https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.150.3698.881 ; in a marsh
"Archaeological evidence of intensive indigenous farming in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, USA" (2025) Science https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ads1643 ; LIDAR identified architectural ridges in forests which would have captured silt when flooded ... citations of: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=1678025822686787882...
"Satellite thermal data applied to landscape archaeology: Mounds in Michigan (1200–1600 CE)" (2026) PNAS https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2528379123
Modern day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45822936 :
- Instream River Training
- LNC Liquid Natural Clay (flood silt in bags)
- River engineering; which beavers used to handle
[dead]