5 ms·
Anything to avoid changing the status quo to reduce emissions. Honestly embarrassing.
by Kapura 5y ago
Anything to avoid changing the status quo to reduce emissions. Honestly embarrassing.
- brutusborn 5y agoHow do you expect humanity to get to pre-industrial revolution carbon dioxide levels without atmospheric extraction?
- _lz4k 5y ago[flagged]
- brutusborn 5y agoI'd much prefer if we kept that as plan B.
- dang 5y agoSince you've been using HN primarily (exclusively?) for political/ideological battle, we've banned the account. Please don't create accounts to break HN's rules with. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- angio 5y agoThe US could halve their emissions and still emit at the same level of an industrialized country like France. A good starting point is to invest more in nuclear energy.
- jjk166 5y agoHalf is still a lot more than zero, which in turn is still not the negative you need to actually reduce the amount of carbon in the atmosphere. Carbon capture is the only option to undo the damage that's already been done, and to sustainably continue the activities where CO2 emissions are fundamentally unavoidable.
- brutusborn 5y agoDid you reply to the wrong question? I'm not sure what your point is and how it relates to mine?
- X6S1x6Okd1st 5y agoThere is no way to fix this problem without carbon removal, even if emissions go to zero today.
- exyi 5y agoyea, but just reducing the emissions ASAP does not seem to a big priority for many states at the moment
- missedthecue 5y agoThe costs are too high, and therefore the electorate is unwilling.