Asklemmy

42525 readers

1585 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

If 'carbon negative' and 'carbon positive' are terms used interchangeably to mean completely opposite things, what are alternative terms that clarify the difference without confusion? (lemmy.world)

submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

For example, could alternative terms like "carbon reducing" and "carbon increasing" make it more clear and avoid misinterpreting which means which?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

How about "positive carbon negativity" and "negative carbon positivity"? As a bonus, this allows us extra terms such as "negative carbon negativity" and "positive carbon positivity" which can be similarly confused for each other!

(On a more serious note, "carbon reducing" and "carbon increasing" are good.)