4 ms·

> The way to address the real problems behind ergophobia is, counterintuitively, more energy. With enough cheap energy, we could literally pull excess carbon di

> The way to address the real problems behind ergophobia is, counterintuitively, more energy. With enough cheap energy, we could literally pull excess carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and bury it again. With cheap energy, we could literally pull excess carbon dioxide, water and nitrogen out of the air and make fats, carbohydrates and amino acids. No need for agricultural land.

mr_mitm 4y ago
But then it will end up in the atmosphere again shortly after. I think the idea is to achieve a reduction in CO2. However, is there a process that sucks out CO2 more effectively than trees doing photosynthesis?
- szpght 4y ago
  If we are able to produce food without agriculture, then we can rewild farmlands and get CO2 sequestration and more wild nature.
  - tuatoru 4y ago
    Exactly!
- ncmncm 4y ago
  You can do both, producing hydrocarbon fuels and carbohydrate calories, and also sequestering carbon. Maybe as diamonds, instead of soot to bury. Yes, you absolutely can trap much more CO2 per unit of collection area with photovoltaics than trees can manage. The trees are cheaper per unit of carbon capturing capacity, but what they bind the carbon into is less useful. That said, wood can be burned in such a way that only the hydrogen oxidizes, leaving charcoal that, powdered, can massively improve soil quality particularly in rainforests. Up until 500 years ago there was a thousands-of-years-long project doing this in the Amazon, interrupted by plague and collapse.
- hedora 4y ago
  Yes. Multiple promising direct air carbon capture technologies exist. At scale, they will cost about $1 to recapture the C02 released by a gallon of gas. None are at scale yet. There is a lot of hand wringing about the cost (negligible compared to annoying Putin or OPEC), and some moral arguments from the greens about how it is unethical to expect our kids to spend electricity to clean up our mess (even though the cost of electricity production is currently dropping faster than it has in our lifetimes).
- picsao 4y ago
mickdeek86 4y ago
Those processes, once developed, would probably use less energy than existing industrial agriculture. So far, the only progress I've heard of in this front is Solar Foods' protein powder
pixl97 4y ago
All energy is entropy the best way to reduce entropy is to work efficiently.
- tuatoru 4y ago
  All poverty is energy poverty.

mr_mitm 4y ago

But then it will end up in the atmosphere again shortly after. I think the idea is to achieve a reduction in CO2. However, is there a process that sucks out CO2 more effectively than trees doing photosynthesis?

szpght 4y ago
If we are able to produce food without agriculture, then we can rewild farmlands and get CO2 sequestration and more wild nature.
- tuatoru 4y ago
  Exactly!
ncmncm 4y ago
You can do both, producing hydrocarbon fuels and carbohydrate calories, and also sequestering carbon. Maybe as diamonds, instead of soot to bury. Yes, you absolutely can trap much more CO2 per unit of collection area with photovoltaics than trees can manage. The trees are cheaper per unit of carbon capturing capacity, but what they bind the carbon into is less useful. That said, wood can be burned in such a way that only the hydrogen oxidizes, leaving charcoal that, powdered, can massively improve soil quality particularly in rainforests. Up until 500 years ago there was a thousands-of-years-long project doing this in the Amazon, interrupted by plague and collapse.
hedora 4y ago
Yes. Multiple promising direct air carbon capture technologies exist. At scale, they will cost about $1 to recapture the C02 released by a gallon of gas. None are at scale yet. There is a lot of hand wringing about the cost (negligible compared to annoying Putin or OPEC), and some moral arguments from the greens about how it is unethical to expect our kids to spend electricity to clean up our mess (even though the cost of electricity production is currently dropping faster than it has in our lifetimes).
picsao 4y ago

mickdeek86 4y ago

Those processes, once developed, would probably use less energy than existing industrial agriculture. So far, the only progress I've heard of in this front is Solar Foods' protein powder

pixl97 4y ago

All energy is entropy the best way to reduce entropy is to work efficiently.

tuatoru 4y ago
All poverty is energy poverty.