for every square kilometre of woodland lost, "we potentially lose almost twice the carbon sink capacity we thought"

TADEAS: vůbec netuším. jak jsem koupil, tak prodávám...

(zřejmě to postavili někde, kde hodně fouká a nejsou schopní jinak tu energii z větru udat...)

XCHAOS: jakou to ma efektivitu?

TUHO: Elliott papers give us a glimpse into how scientists themselves understood the changing climate in the 1970s. Some thought it was a dire issue, perhaps the largest problem humanity would face. Others acknowledged that climate change was an issue, but that more research was required before expecting the worst outcome. Still others, like Elliott, believed climate change was a threat but were pessimistic about the possibility of reducing reliance on fossil fuels. He believed that we would simply have to live with the effects of climate change. Perhaps the most striking aspect of the Elliott papers is how remarkably accurate, even at that early stage of research, CDERA's scientists were in predicting the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide fifty years later, in our present day. Taken together, the CDERA papers reveal the state of scientific knowledge about anthropogenic climate change in the late 1970s. They are, therefore, worth taking some time to explore. The language that scientists used nearly half a century ago is remarkably familiar, and in some instances, no less dire.

Defining floors and ceilings: the contribution of human needs theory
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15487733.2020.1814033

This article argues that a theory of human needs is essential to buttress and give content to the concept of consumption corridors. In particular it enables us to, first, define a safe, just, and sustainable space for humanity, and second, to decompose and recompose consumption based on a distinction between necessities and luxuries. After an introduction, the article is divided into four parts. The first compares different concepts of human needs and concentrates on universalizable need theories. The second presents a method for agreeing on contextual need satisfiers, and the third discusses current research identifying the floors of poverty and necessities. A fourth section then sets out how sustainable needs can underpin the upper bound of the corridor and how this ceiling might be measured in income and consumption terms. However, once we move from a national to a global perspective a profound dilemma is encountered as rich country corridors diverge from a global consumption corridor