Pricefield | Lemmy
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • Create Community
  • heart
    Support Lemmy
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
@[email protected]M to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and [email protected]English • 2 years ago

Direct air capture: An expensive, dangerous distraction from real climate solutions

thebulletin.org

external-link
message-square
13
fedilink
111
external-link

Direct air capture: An expensive, dangerous distraction from real climate solutions

thebulletin.org

@[email protected]M to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and [email protected]English • 2 years ago
message-square
13
fedilink
Separating carbon dioxide from air, while technically straightforward, is outrageously expensive.
  • admiralteal
    link
    fedilink
    13•
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I get that $500/t seems like an absurd price, but honestly that’s not wildly out of line with what the cost of emissions likely are

    Even if we eliminate ALL emissions, we will also need some degree of DAC in the mix. You don’t fix an oil spill by closing the well. You close the well and then cleanup the spill. And if you wait to develop the technology to clean up the spill until after you closed the well, you’ve fucked up. It’s too late.

    There’s a presumption in this kind of publishing that money spent on DAC necessarily is being pulled from other projects. If that’s true, that’s a disaster. But these DAC projects ALSO have to happen. They just have to.

    • 𝗧𝗼𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 *𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑢𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1•2 years ago

      deleted by creator

      • admiralteal
        link
        fedilink
        1•
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        You’ve misinterpreted the article. $500/t is the total LCA per ton captured by the facility.

        Oxy estimates that the project will separate 500,000 tons of carbon dioxide per year and cost about $1 billion to build. Adding in operations and maintenance, we, and others, estimate the total costs will be more than $500 per ton of avoided carbon dioxide.

        • 𝗧𝗼𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 *𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑢𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1•2 years ago

          You’re right, thank you.

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and [email protected]

[email protected]
Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

  • 19 users / day
  • 278 users / week
  • 480 users / month
  • 2.13K users / 6 months
  • 3 subscribers
  • 9.19K Posts
  • 39.6K Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • @[email protected]
  • UI: 0.18.4
  • BE: 0.18.2
  • Modlog
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code
  • join-lemmy.org