3 ms·
In order for non-biological CO2 capture to be workable, we'll need to ramp up energy production maybe 5-10 fold. Without releasing substantially more CO2. Cover
by mirimir 8y ago
In order for non-biological CO2 capture to be workable, we'll need to ramp up energy production maybe 5-10 fold. Without releasing substantially more CO2. Covering the Sahara and US Southwest with PV (and wind farms, where appropriate) might make the nut. But if we manage to dig too huge a climate change hole, we'll likely need more like 20-100 fold more energy. Maybe fusion, or massive orbital solar arrays.
- roryisok 8y agoI read some encouraging recent reports that a Sahara PV project would not only generate about 5 times the energy requirements of civilization, it would also increase rainfall in the Sahara and probably lead to greening. Meanwhile offshore wind in the North Atlantic could also supply multiples of the energy we need. These combined would be sufficient to free us from fossil fuels, future proof us against the increase required from electric vehicles for a decade or two and have plenty left over to power carbon capture projects.
- mirimir 8y agoYes, thanks :) That's what I was thinking of, and ought to have mentioned it. It was on HN within the past week or so. And yes, that could be a great outcome. But sadly enough, I suspect that the situation will get a lot worse before the US, at least, does anything substantial.