2 ms·
The only viable carbon removal technology yet identified is leaving it in the ground. This isn't a smart-arse answer given every additional gallon of oil dug
by NeedMoreTea 8y ago
The only viable carbon removal technology yet identified is leaving it in the ground.
This isn't a smart-arse answer given every additional gallon of oil dug or gas fracked makes the problem worse, the oil industry hasn't yet accepted defeat, and politics still promotes and subsidises fossil.
How then to take that problem out of the realm of political corruption (lobbying) even faster?
We know what to do. Slightly facetiously, simply copy Orkney, we know how, and the cost. Save a little oil for chemicals and plastics that cannot be replaced. Yet we don't. Lobbying and politics is the problem.
- Triesault 8y ago> The only viable carbon removal technology yet identified is leaving it in the ground. The article discusses this point in the second paragraph. > We're now in "Phase 2" and stopping climate change requires both emission reduction and removing CO2 from the atmosphere. "Phase 2" is occurring faster and hotter than we thought. If we don't act soon, we'll end up in "Phase 3" and be too late for both of these strategies to work.
- NeedMoreTea 8y agoThat is far from discussing. Do you think the political part of the problem will magically go away if there is a viable phase 3 technology that does not contribute more carbon than it captures? Do you think the politicians will permit it to be used at scale when they have done all possible to slow renewables?
- questionasked 8y agoThis. 100 companies are responsible for 70% of the worlds emissions. Yes, carbon capture tech is needed, but you're missing the point if you think its the _only_ thing thats needed.