39 points

Have to agree with all the scepticism. Even if this does work, it’s just going to end up being used as an excuse to allow continued pollution rather than the clean up measure it should be.

It’s a stupid game to play, and should not be considered our long term strategy… then again, right now the long term strategy seems to be kicking the can down the road, so this might be better than nothing.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

I think finding a renewable way of producing hydrocarbons for fuel is pretty valuable though — if these carbon vacuums can eventually be used to essentially turn solar into hydrocarbons, that’s pretty useful.

Hydrocarbons are, unfortunately, a really great way of storing energy Although hydrogen and batteries are great, stuff like fast transcontinental flights are tough to achieve without the use of jet fuel.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

It is valuable, but at the moment it’s like we’ve got a hole in our boat and we’re just throwing the water back out with a bucket. Essentially useless in the long-term without plugging up the hole!

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

I fully agree with Al Gore on this one. It’s not a solution at all and just provides an excuse to keep using carbon based fuel, just like the Germans and their e-fuel. Not saying it doesn’t have any useful real world application, but you’re deluded if you think this will ever be enough to continue using fossil fuels.

For example it could work very well in fighting smog if applied on an industrial scale, but it still is just a sorry excuse to whitewash carbon based fuels.

permalink
report
reply
12 points
*

But every green tech can be used as an excuse. Like oil companies have built solar and wind farms and then claim that they are green.

End of the day we still need this kind of tech. If we stop pumping green house gasses into the air today we are still dealing with climate change because of the enormous amount we have put into the air. And trees alone will not scrub the air fast enough. And the amount of CO2 absorbing biomass we can add per year is probably not sufficient.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

I posted this when I saw this on another community:

This is honestly probably more of a transition jobs program for oil workers and something designed to get a few extra votes in Congress. One of the projects is in my state (Louisiana) and the politicians all stressed how it’s creating jobs in the oil producing Southwest part of the state. And the other project is in East Texas. The companies even pinky swore that at least 10% of their workforce would be former oil workers.

In the end, I see this a low risk, high reward experiment that, while obviously used for greenwashing, also builds support for a green economy in places where oil jobs are the middle class ones.

I also could see this being a way to create specialized carbon-based fuels after the transition. Hopefully, it gets cheaper than drilling and can supply whatever “fossil” fuels are still around. (The world’s militaries probably aren’t gonna switch to green hydrogen and renewables by 2040.)

permalink
report
reply
3 points
*

This is a bit like giving serial rapists jobs watching after victims of sexual assault.

The shit states shouldn’t profit from the mess they made.

Tax the states/corporations responsible, maybe give some back to workers.

Kids who died of asthma aren’t getting anything out of this deal, why should oil states?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I agree. Outlaw petroleum extraction and then just nuke the areas that have the petroleum workers. Blame the nukes on Russia or China. No more industry, no jobs to worry about. [brushed dust off hands] Done and done.

/s

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

If you nuked half of Texas, how could you tell which half is which?

I guess one side would have somewhat fewer epic assholes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Louisiana doesn’t benefit from the fucking oil industry bribing politicians, raising sea levels, industrializing coastal areas, and giving people cancer. The companies aren’t even based here. We’re just cursed to be next to Texas.

And Texans also don’t benefit from being a corrupt petrostate. The natural resource curse is real.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The rest of the US doesn’t benefit from being next to Texas, but we have to draw a line somewhere.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I see this more as an attempt to sway voters who are motivated by their jobs to vote for oil friendly politicians.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

This just in…

GOP leaders have pushed through a measure outlawing all forms of vacuum cleaners.

permalink
report
reply
22 points

Doing anything but actually solve the problem. Amazing.

permalink
report
reply
13 points

Actually this solves a very important problem. If we stop all pollution and carbon emissions today the earth will still be heated up significantly for the next thousand years or so. Enough that life will be more than uncomfortable, we’ll have massive water shortages, widespread desertification, and wholesale extinctions of many plants and animals.

We need carbon sequestration if we want to control the damage already done.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I would love to see some actual numbers on how much greenhouse gasses we release in the process of carbon sequestration. If we’re using carbon energy sources that emit more than they capture then we’re making the problem worse. I kind of doubt the US is going to use solar, wind, nuclear, and hydro to sequester carbon right now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

By definition it isn’t carbon sequestration if the grams CO2 equivalent (gCO2e) isn’t negative after a full lifecycle study. Lifecycle studies are somewhat contentious as you might imagine since they try to encompass so much in one number, but generally studies agree that the major proposals are strongly negative.

You can read more about that here for a few of the more likely candidates. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_sequestration#Geologic_carbon_sequestration

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 284K

    Comments