No. I’m pointing to the extreme disparity in costs of your trade-off. Sacrificing a percent of taiga to eliminate a large chunk of CO2 emissions is not “an overwhelming environmental loss that ensures impossibility.” You claim “always end up on ice due to ecological impacts.” I’m not sure Russia cares as much about their environment as you do, either. They already seem quite interested in that Arctic shipping-lane, already. Your claim of ‘impossibility’ doesn’t hold-up to the details.
was this meant as a personal attack or something? I’m confused.
No. I’m pointing to the extreme disparity in costs of your trade-off. Sacrificing a percent of taiga to eliminate a large chunk of CO2 emissions is not “an overwhelming environmental loss that ensures impossibility.” You claim “always end up on ice due to ecological impacts.” I’m not sure Russia cares as much about their environment as you do, either. They already seem quite interested in that Arctic shipping-lane, already. Your claim of ‘impossibility’ doesn’t hold-up to the details.