Technology

59257 readers

2898 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

239

The US just invested more than $1 billion into carbon removal / The move represents a big step in the effort to suck CO2 out of the atmosphere—and slow down climate change. (archive.ph)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

79 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The US just invested more than $1 billion into carbon removal / The move represents a big step in the effort to suck CO2 out of the atmosphere—and slow down climate change.::undefined

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Instead spend the money on removing the emission sources and modernizing our grid/reducing fuel emissions.

These things are not exclusive they are complimentary.; things like CarbonCapture's Project Bison show how this can work.

They will buy power from Solar / Wind farms which causes energy suppliers to build more of them. They use the power to run their DAC and Carbon Sequestration Wells. Their plants are modular so as more power becomes available and the tech matures they add more modules. They're supposed to start operating later this year and when it does it will be removing three times more CO2 from the atmosphere than the worlds next largest plant.

That kind of project results in CO2 capture and accelerates the shift away from fossil fuels.

We are past the point of either / or, we need and solutions if we are going to fix this problem in the required time frame.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I agree, however as much as I wish our governments would do both - they won't. At least not This is why I said we should be playing money ball. I don't disagree with anything you said.

I think the additionallity to the grid as these renewables come online is great...but if they only cover the energy to run them then they're not expanding the grid for everyone else. This emissions continue. I agree it incentvizes renewable builds but only if it powers more of the grid vs just being dedicated to the wells.

We're headed towards a world where corps are incentvizes to buy up all the clean energy on the market and leave consumers with the fossile fuels right now. We just don't have enough clean or renewable energy to power everything and demand is only increasing.