They keep coming up with all these excuses to avoid stopping pollution at its source.
As the world struggles to stay below the 1.5-degree Celsius global warming threshold
Oh, honey. We accelerated past that just last year. We’re solidly on the path to +4℃, and likely a lot more than that.
Seems we’ll do anything to avoid riding bicycles and not flying.
Yes by emitting less co2 and by protecting vulnerable sea life
But did you ever think of corporate profits? Those poor shareholders!!! 😭😭😭
Okay, now what if we “try” anything but that?
Well the US military figured out you can extract carbon dioxide from the ocean easier than from the air and proved that a small reactor (nuclear on an air craft carrier) could in a day collect enough to counter the amount of fuel burned when in an active combat zone.
Another alternative for carbon capture is conversion into blocks of carbon (sometimes called coal) and shoving them into holes in the ground (could be called a reverse coal mine)
I think you missed the part where extracting CO2 costs huge amounts of energy, and converting it back to oxygen to capture pure carbon costs the exact same amount of energy as you got when you burned it in the same place. Add losses due to heat etc, and basically if you want to dial back the clock for CO2 levels, and given that no other extra CO2 is being emitted anymore, you’d need to spend about twice the energy the world generated. Want to dial CO2 back how it was 10 years ago? That’ll cost you about twice amount of energy that the world has spent over the past ten years by burning fossil fuels.
And that is on top of the normal world consumption of energy, and that is also assuming that all CO2 emissions have stopped. That is also ignoring energy costs for storing the carbon as well
So yeah, good luck with that.
Yeah, we are going to have to do that to unterraform our planet.
Might as well harvest sunlight to do it.
I’m a little confused they are taking CO2 from the ocean? Why would they collect CO2 from the ocean to counter fuke burned?
If you are in a warzone and need to keep combat craft operational when access to fossil fuels from external sources is limited but you have a nuclear reactor at your disposal; you make jet fuel and remain operational.
Please let’s do that, I like the sounds of that.
It sounds good, and long-term it’s a nice tool to have, but it’s nowhere near fast or effective enough to counter even a fraction of actual emissions. This is a “we’re basically already at net zero and now we can start trying to recover” tool. Not a “Yay, we can keep burning!” tool.
I agree with you. Let’s do all the measures and then some more. I’m just a bit fed up with doing nothing and then cry.
The first edition of “Waves and Beaches” (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1571715.Waves_and_Beaches) by eminent oceanographer Willard Bascom in 1963 advocated throwing human-made garbage into the ocean instead of landfill. His argument was that the ocean was so much bigger, the bad stuff would get diluted, and eventually sink to the ocean floor out of harm’s way.
The most recent posthumous edition in 2021 (https://www.patagonia.com/product/waves-and-beaches-the-powerful-dynamics-of-sea-and-coast-book/BK855.html) updated by a co-author and with gorgeous graphics, by the way, tries to handwave away all that by explaining ‘Eh, that was then, we know so much more now.’ I have both.
Point is, scientists can be myopically stupid as well. Laws of unintended consequence, mongoose and snake story, yada yada.
Please don’t throw chemicals into the ocean.
It seems that someone noticed that absorbing CO2 leads to ocean acidity rising (the carbonate ion, CO3, is a negatively charged ion with a nominal charge of -2).
Neutralizing CO3 by providing it something permanent to bind with - for example by forming NaHCO3 - will likely have the desired effect (nobody goes testing with a ship without first testing in a lab)…
…but the scale of the task makes me doubt if this is a feasible / reasonable approach. All that sodium to make soda would have to be produced somehow, without emitting almost any CO2. This, I have doubts about feasibility.
As corporate interest in ocean carbon removal grows, researchers from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution are testing the safety and effectiveness of one such technique in the Gulf of Maine.
Yes anything but slow growth need arrow to go up. Can we just kill these fuckers already. Where are all the people saying Luigi started something haven’t seen any other billionaires die.
You are stuck in a algorithm Hole, at least five CEOs have died in America since Luigi
