4 ms·
You don't need to build carbon capture plants near people, you can build them anywhere in the world. So you can put them in places where you have the potential
by phire 3y ago
You don't need to build carbon capture plants near people, you can build them anywhere in the world.
So you can put them in places where you have the potential for large amounts of cheap renewable energy that would otherwise be unused. Build solar plants in the middle of the desert, build tidal and wind generation on remote islands. There are plenty of places where green energy projects never got off the ground simply because the cost of transmitting it to places with energy demand was cost prohibitive.
The bigger problem is that simply removing CO2 from the atmosphere is not enough, you have to actually store it somewhere and be confident it will stay locked up for centuries, otherwise the effort is wasted.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Iridescent_ 3y agoYou need to build carbon capture at emission sites however. Carbon density in regular air is too low for capture to be efficient, it needs to be captured as the air exits fossil fuel power plants, which is difficult enough as is (I believe we can reasonably get about two thirds of the CO2 this way) to not be enough at all. All in all, carbon capture is just a way to pretend to solve issues while only dealing with symptoms. GHG (and CO2) are just one of the many consequences of the excessive pressure our society has on our environment, and solving just one consequence won't save us from all the other (resource exhaustion, biodiversity collapse, GHG besides CO2).