silence7 ( silence7@slrpnk.net ) M to Climate@slrpnk.netEnglish · 3 years agoU.S. to Fund a $1.2 Billion Effort to Vacuum Greenhouse Gases From the Sky | Many scientists are skeptical of the technology, and environmentalists have criticized the approach.www.nytimes.comexternal-linkmessage-square5linkfedilinkarrow-up127
arrow-up127external-linkU.S. to Fund a $1.2 Billion Effort to Vacuum Greenhouse Gases From the Sky | Many scientists are skeptical of the technology, and environmentalists have criticized the approach.www.nytimes.comsilence7 ( silence7@slrpnk.net ) M to Climate@slrpnk.netEnglish · 3 years agomessage-square5linkfedilink
minus-squarecerement ( cerement@slrpnk.net ) linkfedilinkarrow-up7·3 years ago“vacuum greenhouse gases from the sky” … “many scientists are skeptical of the technology” well … when you phrase it like that, I wonder why?
minus-squaresilence7 ( silence7@slrpnk.net ) OPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·3 years agoBasically: you can do it, but for almost all applications, it’s a lot cheaper to avoid burning fossil fuels than it is to remove CO2 from the atmosphere afterwards.
minus-squareKittenstix ( Kittenstix@beehaw.org ) linkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·3 years agoConsidering it took eons to get the carbon into solid form from the last time it was in the atmosphere, that makes sense.
“vacuum greenhouse gases from the sky” … “many scientists are skeptical of the technology”
well … when you phrase it like that, I wonder why?
Basically: you can do it, but for almost all applications, it’s a lot cheaper to avoid burning fossil fuels than it is to remove CO2 from the atmosphere afterwards.
Considering it took eons to get the carbon into solid form from the last time it was in the atmosphere, that makes sense.