4 ms·

This was intuitively obvious already, but there's still great value is having proper research prove this too. Anyone building an argument on "carbon capture is

This was intuitively obvious already, but there's still great value is having proper research prove this too. Anyone building an argument on "carbon capture is more costly" so far had the burden of proving this, even if it is intuitively obvious. Now they can cite existing research and move on with their point.

zelphirkalt 2y ago
I feel like probably not much has changed. People, who will listen and think a little for themselves, will already be able to come to the conclusion, that it is better not to put the CO2 out in the first place. And those who are typically pretending to only not believe it because one cannot provide a research article, are very likely to just try to discredit the research. Some people are just so lost, that you cannot change their mind with facts, whatever those facts are, and whatever you do. They do not want to. They want you to spend more time and effort on them than is proportionate.
- goatlover 2y ago
  Putting CO2 out in the first place is how the global economy got to where it is today. It's better not to put CO2 out in the first place except for when it makes more economic sense. There are tradeoffs involved. To the extent renewables can replace outputting greenhouse gases, then that makes more sense. But where they still can't, then it doesn't make sense. And we likely will still need to remove some of that CO2 in the future.
  - zelphirkalt 2y ago
    > Putting CO2 out in the first place is how the global economy got to where it is today. And now we have realized, that it is dangerous to continue doing more of that and need to live with reality.
joe_the_user 2y ago
Arguing with someone who starts demanding your obvious claim has the burden of proof is useless. Any proof you offer is going to contain an obvious step or assumption and they demand proof for that too.

4 ms·

This was intuitively obvious already, but there's still great value is having proper research prove this too. Anyone building an argument on "carbon capture is

by WhyNotHugo 2y ago

zelphirkalt 2y ago
I feel like probably not much has changed. People, who will listen and think a little for themselves, will already be able to come to the conclusion, that it is better not to put the CO2 out in the first place. And those who are typically pretending to only not believe it because one cannot provide a research article, are very likely to just try to discredit the research. Some people are just so lost, that you cannot change their mind with facts, whatever those facts are, and whatever you do. They do not want to. They want you to spend more time and effort on them than is proportionate.
- goatlover 2y ago
  Putting CO2 out in the first place is how the global economy got to where it is today. It's better not to put CO2 out in the first place except for when it makes more economic sense. There are tradeoffs involved. To the extent renewables can replace outputting greenhouse gases, then that makes more sense. But where they still can't, then it doesn't make sense. And we likely will still need to remove some of that CO2 in the future.
  - zelphirkalt 2y ago
    > Putting CO2 out in the first place is how the global economy got to where it is today. And now we have realized, that it is dangerous to continue doing more of that and need to live with reality.
joe_the_user 2y ago
Arguing with someone who starts demanding your obvious claim has the burden of proof is useless. Any proof you offer is going to contain an obvious step or assumption and they demand proof for that too.