Seems like everybody like you wants to spend money without diligence when it’s the public money.
Proven methods of combating climate change are being ignored here. Hell, the government need not even invest in proven techs like wind farms and solar… they could put that money into modernizing the power grid and even that would be better than… whatever shit this is.
Proven methods of combating climate change are being ignored here.
No they aren’t, those things are getting investment too.
Opportunity cost exists, yes this money could have gone to solar power instead, but we need to know if it’s possible to do carbon capture at scale in addition to doing everything else because it’s the only way to possibly reverse what we have already done.
It’s next to impossible to disprove a scientific approach. We already know carbon capture has been ineffective. We’re already in the phase to reduce the funding and focus on proven methods. That’s what net-zero by 2050 means.
What’s likely to happen with carbon capture is that we supply money for decades if not centuries because it’s hard to disprove.
It seems absurd to me that we’re spending effort on reversing entropic processes (effectively unburning burned carbon by filtering it through a mixed atmosphere) when there are far more straightforward solutions involving not burning that carbon in the first place. Or, hell, even just putting carbon filters on the power plants.
Because the second law of thermodynamics applies here. It will always be more efficient, simpler, and cheaper to not release the carbon in the first place. And if we are not even doing that… What solution could direct air capture ever provide?
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Seems like everybody like you wants to spend money without diligence when it’s the public money.
Proven methods of combating climate change are being ignored here. Hell, the government need not even invest in proven techs like wind farms and solar… they could put that money into modernizing the power grid and even that would be better than… whatever shit this is.
No they aren’t, those things are getting investment too.
Opportunity cost exists, yes this money could have gone to solar power instead, but we need to know if it’s possible to do carbon capture at scale in addition to doing everything else because it’s the only way to possibly reverse what we have already done.
It’s next to impossible to disprove a scientific approach. We already know carbon capture has been ineffective. We’re already in the phase to reduce the funding and focus on proven methods. That’s what net-zero by 2050 means.
What’s likely to happen with carbon capture is that we supply money for decades if not centuries because it’s hard to disprove.
It seems absurd to me that we’re spending effort on reversing entropic processes (effectively unburning burned carbon by filtering it through a mixed atmosphere) when there are far more straightforward solutions involving not burning that carbon in the first place. Or, hell, even just putting carbon filters on the power plants.
Because the second law of thermodynamics applies here. It will always be more efficient, simpler, and cheaper to not release the carbon in the first place. And if we are not even doing that… What solution could direct air capture ever provide?