5 ms·

might be an unpopular prediction on this board but i believe climate change will be solved by technology and not reduced consumption. electricity generation als

might be an unpopular prediction on this board but i believe climate change will be solved by technology and not reduced consumption. electricity generation also has significant environmental impact and is not a solution in itself

haberman 8y ago
I very much want to believe this. But how?
- tormeh 8y ago
  It cannot be achieved through reduced consumption. Humans won't allow it. It's technology or bust.
  - zzzeek 8y ago
    I think the idea is that humanity itself dies off in large numbers due to lack of food, potable water, wars, etc. There's how you get your reduced consumption. The earth itself is just fine with this natural cycle.
xenophonf 8y ago
Here's your technological solution: Use more efficient, less polluting (and slower) turbofan engines instead of less efficient, more polluting (and faster) turbojects. And here's the attendant public policy: Tax the turbojects' users enough to offset the negative ecological externalities incurred by their use. That will likely make commercial SST unprofitable.
- MayeulC 8y ago
  As far as I know, and according to Wikipedia, most commercial airliners already use turbofans [1], which are high-bypass turbojets [2]. Unless you were referring to turboprops? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbofan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbofan
- jandrese 8y ago
  Almost nobody uses turbojets anymore. Certainly not airliners. Even fighter jets use turbofans.
  - xenophonf 8y ago
    Exactly my point.
larkeith 8y ago
> electricity generation also has significant environmental impact Hydropower? The primary materials used are concrete and steel, and dams last for centuries with minimal upkeep. As long as appropriate measures (such as fish ladders) are taken, the local and global environmental impact is negligible.
gascan 8y ago
Maybe, but we at least need to buy time until we otherwise solve the problems using technology.
jadedhacker 8y ago
How much energy does it take to turn CO2 back into oil? Is there a viable synthesis pathway? Carbon neutral oil would be fabulous. I'm guessing you have to spend a significant amount of energy to turn it back into oil, but is it 1.01x? 1.5x? 10x? 200x? The lower range would be viable to work with other kinds of renewables. Can't store solar at night? Turn atmospheric carbon into oil. It doesn't have to be cheaper than oil (it almost certainly can't be unless it gets too hard to drill), but we can subsidize it within some kind of range. EDIT: Oh cool, some people are trying this. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/407748/making-gasoline-from-carbon-dioxide/ https://www.technologyreview.com/s/407748/making-gasoline-fr... https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/09/feature-there-s-too-much-carbon-dioxide-air-why-not-turn-it-back-fuel https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/09/feature-there-s-too-...

haberman 8y ago

I very much want to believe this. But how?

tormeh 8y ago
It cannot be achieved through reduced consumption. Humans won't allow it. It's technology or bust.
- zzzeek 8y ago
  I think the idea is that humanity itself dies off in large numbers due to lack of food, potable water, wars, etc. There's how you get your reduced consumption. The earth itself is just fine with this natural cycle.

xenophonf 8y ago

Here's your technological solution: Use more efficient, less polluting (and slower) turbofan engines instead of less efficient, more polluting (and faster) turbojects. And here's the attendant public policy: Tax the turbojects' users enough to offset the negative ecological externalities incurred by their use. That will likely make commercial SST unprofitable.

MayeulC 8y ago
As far as I know, and according to Wikipedia, most commercial airliners already use turbofans [1], which are high-bypass turbojets [2]. Unless you were referring to turboprops? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbofan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbofan
jandrese 8y ago
Almost nobody uses turbojets anymore. Certainly not airliners. Even fighter jets use turbofans.
- xenophonf 8y ago
  Exactly my point.

larkeith 8y ago

> electricity generation also has significant environmental impact Hydropower? The primary materials used are concrete and steel, and dams last for centuries with minimal upkeep. As long as appropriate measures (such as fish ladders) are taken, the local and global environmental impact is negligible.

gascan 8y ago

Maybe, but we at least need to buy time until we otherwise solve the problems using technology.

jadedhacker 8y ago

How much energy does it take to turn CO2 back into oil? Is there a viable synthesis pathway? Carbon neutral oil would be fabulous. I'm guessing you have to spend a significant amount of energy to turn it back into oil, but is it 1.01x? 1.5x? 10x? 200x? The lower range would be viable to work with other kinds of renewables. Can't store solar at night? Turn atmospheric carbon into oil. It doesn't have to be cheaper than oil (it almost certainly can't be unless it gets too hard to drill), but we can subsidize it within some kind of range. EDIT: Oh cool, some people are trying this. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/407748/making-gasoline-from-carbon-dioxide/ https://www.technologyreview.com/s/407748/making-gasoline-fr... https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/09/feature-there-s-too-much-carbon-dioxide-air-why-not-turn-it-back-fuel https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/09/feature-there-s-too-...