For example, could alternative terms like “carbon reducing” and “carbon increasing” make it more clear and avoid misinterpreting which means which?
For example, could alternative terms like “carbon reducing” and “carbon increasing” make it more clear and avoid misinterpreting which means which?
I don’t get where you think those terms are confusing.
Not OP, but I imagine “carbon negative” sounds negative because it has the word “negative” in it.
When it fact “carbon negative” means you’re reducing carbon, which is generally regarded as a positive thing.
deleted by creator
“Negative feedback loop? That sounds bad!”
I agree it’s time for people to be able to comprehend words again.
It sounds like OP has heard people say “carbon negative” to mean that something outputs more CO2 than it consumes, and vice versa, which is contrary to how I hear the terms used.
“Our approach to carbon is negative for the planet”
Though I agree it’s not really used in this way.
Some have used “carbon positive” in the sense that the outcome is positive, or that their carbon reduction is positive, while most use “carbon negative” to mean a reduction.
It’s like going to a doctor and having him tell me the results are positive. That’s good news!