silence7@slrpnk.netM to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.@slrpnk.netEnglish · 1 year 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-square5fedilinkarrow-up136arrow-down12
arrow-up134arrow-down1external-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@slrpnk.netM to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.@slrpnk.netEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square5fedilink
minus-squarecerement@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkarrow-up11·1 year 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@slrpnk.netOPMlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·1 year 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@beehaw.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·1 year 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.