346
submitted 18 hours ago by rimu@piefed.social to c/climate_lm@slrpnk.net
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 2 points 9 hours ago

Yeah I think even a cursory glance at the economics of it demonstrates that prevention is much much more viable than sequestration after the fact.

That said, I still think it's worth studying because once CO2 emissions have reached zero it might make sense to start trying to bring atmospheric CO2 down a bit to prevent further warming. Especially if the doomers end up being correct and we enter some kind of feedback loop.

[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 8 hours ago

maybe, but so long as we're in the political climate that we are i really fear that even studying it feeds into greenwashing and slowing down the transition away from fossil fuels.

the big problem is that things are extremely fucking urgent, even the slightest delay to reducing emissions is going to kill.. thousands of people, at least.

this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2026
346 points (98.6% liked)

🌱Climate Change🌡⛈

1034 readers
367 users here now

This is a no agenda less moderated variation of !climate@slrpnk.net. Moderation power is not abused and mods do not suppress ideas in order to control the narrative.

Obvious spam, uncivil posts and misinfo are not immune to intervention, but on-topic civil posts are certain to not be subject to censorship (unlike the excessive interventalism we see in the other climate community).

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS