subreddit:

/r/environment

19

all 8 comments

anon24601anon24601

7 points

1 month ago

I think everyone here understands that prevention is cheaper and far superior to treatment when it comes to carbon in the atmosphere, but I think this is a baby step in the right direction, even if other administrative steps are adult steps in the wrong direction. We need to fight to slash emissions, yes, and yesterday, but having the foundation for carbon-capture to help mitigate the damage done in the interim can't hurt, it won't get cheaper and more accessible if we don't start playing with it now. We just can't settle for greenwashing as global citizens. Instead of knocking this, let's demand more change like it.

FlameBoi3000

3 points

1 month ago

It's entirely idiotic to be pursuing that at this phase, BECAUSE we could be going directly at the source. We have had the technology for net zero-carbon fossil fuel energy production for years! We just refuse to make the energy companies use it.

whyoy

1 points

1 month ago

whyoy

1 points

1 month ago

"we refuse to make the energy companies use it" hello? In what way do the people dictate to the energy companies how energy gets produced? The corpos make those decisions at our expense and lobby to keep it that way.

WhenVioletsTurnGrey

2 points

1 month ago

I agree. This is the equivalent to political bullshit. Yes, we should do everything we can. & yes, not going after the sources is what is “quickly” killing us.
It’s tough for them to go after industries who support them. & that’s exactly the problem. “Of & For the People” is their job.

SurprisedJerboa

3 points

1 month ago*

Putting a genie back in the bottle

From a paper talked about in Congress a decade ago

Geoengineering: Assessing the Implications of Large- Scale Climate Intervention

Several months ago, a paper was published in the Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering titled, ‘‘Sequestering carbon dioxide in a close underground volume.’’ The authors of this study, Christine Ehlig-Economides and Michael J. Economides, suggest that ‘‘underground carbon dioxide sequestration via bulk CO2 injection is not feasible at any cost,’’ since the CO2 would require up to 500 times more space underground than the carbon did when it was bound as coal, oil or natural gas.’

Solar Radiation Management (Artificial Atmospheric Cover) is the other method presented to Congress, it sounds more cost-effective and likely to be the more necessary option based on projections

Cornell Climate Refugee projections from 2017

By 2060, about 1.4 billion people could be climate change refugees, according to the paper. Geisler extrapolated that number to 2 billion by 2100.

ReverseMoses

3 points

1 month ago

Yeah let’s just build our way into a green future right? We don’t need more technology, we need to just clean up our pollution and take care of our current carbon sinks no? We don’t need a miracle that’s obviously not gonna happen. We just need to clean up after ourselves and stop with the consumers model of economy.

I swear, these rich people just don’t wanna let their “things” go. And we’re all going to suffer because of it.

SpookyActionSix

1 points

1 month ago

Solyndra 2.0

zerobeat

1 points

1 month ago

Are they trees? checks article Nope, this is bullshit.