3 ms·

I don't believe carbon emissions will be "solved" by global altruism or even government regulation. This is something that will have a technological solution.

by cletus 6y ago

I don't believe carbon emissions will be "solved" by global altruism or even government regulation. This is something that will have a technological solution. Carbon sequestration from the atmosphere is not a hard problem and turning atmospheric carbon into fuel is not a hard problem. It just makes no sense to burn fossil fuels to do it. This is a net energy loss although there's still a market for turning inconvenient energy sources into convenient ones. But as soon as the energy source is cheaper than fossil fuels, the equation completely changes. This, to me, is the ultimate promise of renewables. It may well be the promise of fusion too but I'm not yet convinced fusion will ever be commercially viable. I'm least convinced about Tokamak reactors. New designs may prevail. Fusion is attractive because of the abundance of the fuel but the problems of containment (eg turbulence), alpha particle embrittlement and neutron embrittlement remain... huge. Stars contain all this with gravity.

vegetablepotpie 6y ago
To a large extent the equation is already flipping. Solar and wind are getting cheaper every year and will decisively beat fossil fuels on a dollar per watt basis eventually. I believe we need to go faster than what is economically feasible because according to the IPCC we are on track to a +4C world by 2100 where a +2C change will already lead to catastrophic consequences for civilization. Government regulation and individual altruism is necessary, but not sufficient, to solve the emissions problem. There are other tools though. Government incentives can change the economics to make necessary changes happen faster. For example California's cap and trade system has enabled new business opportunities, which reduce climate change. There are companies that make money by gathering old refrigerant and incinerate it to sell carbon offsets because of cap and trade. https://gimletmedia.com/shows/howtosaveaplanet/kwhnz8b https://gimletmedia.com/shows/howtosaveaplanet/kwhnz8b

by cletus 6y ago

vegetablepotpie 6y ago

To a large extent the equation is already flipping. Solar and wind are getting cheaper every year and will decisively beat fossil fuels on a dollar per watt basis eventually. I believe we need to go faster than what is economically feasible because according to the IPCC we are on track to a +4C world by 2100 where a +2C change will already lead to catastrophic consequences for civilization. Government regulation and individual altruism is necessary, but not sufficient, to solve the emissions problem. There are other tools though. Government incentives can change the economics to make necessary changes happen faster. For example California's cap and trade system has enabled new business opportunities, which reduce climate change. There are companies that make money by gathering old refrigerant and incinerate it to sell carbon offsets because of cap and trade. https://gimletmedia.com/shows/howtosaveaplanet/kwhnz8b https://gimletmedia.com/shows/howtosaveaplanet/kwhnz8b