4 ms·

Whenever carbon removal is mentioned there's always a bit of a push back (cost, effort, excuse to keep emitting etc.). So I'd like to address some of these: Ca

Whenever carbon removal is mentioned there's always a bit of a push back (cost, effort, excuse to keep emitting etc.). So I'd like to address some of these: Carbon removal is not a substitute for reducing emissions. However even if we stop emitting tomorrow there is still an excess of emissions in the atmosphere that must be addressed. Nature can do it in theory but it would take millenia and there is a chance that we - as humanity - have tipped the scales too far. Carbon removal is expensive and inefficient - for now. This is how technology starts and will come down an innovation and cost curve with enough demand and investment. Do not try and extrapolate the cost and efficiency now to the total removals - there will be constant innovation and new methods that we haven't discovered yet. There is no silver bullet. Trees, DACS, bio-oil and whatever else - nothing can do this on its own and we need to support as many of these as possible to work together. If you want to do something may I suggest looking at how you can reduce your footprint and - if you can afford it - look at removing your carbon footprint instead of merely offsetting it with cheap carbon credits. Set yourself a realistic price per ton and check out https://carbonremoved.com https://carbonremoved.com (disclaimer - my project that I made to remove my own footprint) to remove it. We also need system change so talk to people, educate them (and yourself) and vote for politicians who support a green agenda rather than those who block it.

Traster 5y ago
For me, carbon removal is a quite good answer to the international crisis of the commons. A constant difficulty with international efforts for carbon reduction is that different countries think they should have different 'budgets' for carbon, or are under an unfair burden. On top of this almost any significant enough country can effectively destroy the communcal effort to reduce emissions. Carbon removal is almost the only hope for rich nations to unilaterally reduce carbon in the atmosphere.

Traster 5y ago

For me, carbon removal is a quite good answer to the international crisis of the commons. A constant difficulty with international efforts for carbon reduction is that different countries think they should have different 'budgets' for carbon, or are under an unfair burden. On top of this almost any significant enough country can effectively destroy the communcal effort to reduce emissions. Carbon removal is almost the only hope for rich nations to unilaterally reduce carbon in the atmosphere.