this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
58 points (100.0% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5205 readers
937 users here now

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.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 year ago (4 children)

It was designed to capture approximately 4,000 metric tons of carbon from the air per year, which, as one climate scientist, David Ho, put it, is the equivalent of rolling back the clock on just 3 seconds of global emissions.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago

first-of-its-kind demonstration plant

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago

The article goes on to say that this plant isn't really intended to have any serious climate impact itself, it's more a small scale testbed to see how the technology works out in real world conditions and to try to improve and develop it further. So while it might be the world's largest plant of the type currently, that's only because nobody has actually built one on a useful scale yet.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep. For CDR to make a meaningful difference we need to both scale it up, and get down to near zero fossil fuel use

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

indeed. this tech is best thought of as being in the R&D stage. we're gonna need enough clean energy to power ourselves and it too before it really makes a difference. we can throw excess renewables at it now, though.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Better 3 seconds than 0. We need everything we can to fight climate change if we are even going to have a chance of mitigating the damage.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Probably not. This sort of project is used by bad-faith actors, and naive policymakers, to justify not taking urgent action to curtail emissions. There's a good case for saying it would be better if this sort of piffling demonstration didn't exist, because then it would be harder to delay action on emissions

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Unfortunately the reality is that if we do not figure out how to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere, we are 100% going to breach a tipping point for CO2. We crossed the line of being able to stop this with CO2 reductions decades ago.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

This sort of project is used by bad-faith actors, and naive policymakers, to justify not taking urgent action to curtail emissions.

this doesn't mean anything. they did the same with a snowball once.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Net negative likely. How much CO2 was emitted to create this plant?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Per the article, building the plant generated about 15% of the CO2 it will remove. Operating it and downtime consume another 20% or so. It's still a net benefit...but a tiny one.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I have a way to do this but it would require people to plant trees.

https://ecotree.green/en/how-much-co2-does-a-tree-absorb

25kg per year, per tree. Let's plant these "trees" everywhere.

If every one of the 20 some million adult Canadians planted a tree once a week for say 10 weeks a year, just imagine. 20 million x 10 x 25kg sequestered a year later and you get additional benefits. No need to change your lifestyle, just plant on on the fringe of grass by the Walmart parking spot, drop on in by your workplace, etc. Golf courses: sorry we need trees, your lifestyle will change sooner rather than later anyway golf course user.

Edit: 5 million metric tonnes, I think.

And, hey, why not pay young people to do this? You get a tray of trees in the morning. Sign into your app, document each tree. In addition to planting the app sends you to previous locations others planted trees at to verify the tree is there.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

5 million tonnes.

But then if 4000 tonnes is equal to reversing 3s worth of emissions, 5 million tonnes would still only be 3750s, or just over 1 hour.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yup, not awesome but you do it year after year. It might help raise consciousness. But, yes, ultimately a drop in the bucket.