Neither trees nor these can help much if fossil fuels continue to be burned at increasing rates.
Comment on Inspiring. Innovating.
kokesh@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Only if we should have natural solution to this problem… Let’s fuck up the planet even more by producing more shit. How about planting trees and stopping the deforestation.
Jason2357@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
kokesh@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
That’s for sure. But as I don’t see people going away from fossil fuels anytime soon, we have to at least make it less terrible. EVs aren’t an answer, as making the batteries fucks up the nature a lot, wind power takes more energy to build than it will return in it’s lifetime and the machines will haunt us after they are decommissioned. I live in northern Sweden and because people in south aren’t too keen to look at those ugly things, they place it around their colony, the north. So we have new roads in forests, trees are being cut fo huge wind farms screwing up our ecosystem and being transported up here mostly from Denmark. Everyone trying to minimize their impact is currently at least a dim path forward. People are against nuclear, but if properly executed, it is currently the cleanest energy we have. Let’s hope cold fusion comes quick.
AA5B@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
www.usatoday.com/story/news/…/9542766002/
wrong. Wind turbines recoup the energy required to build them within a year of normal operation
Jason2357@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Reduction in emissions, absolutely! Direct carbon capture isn’t that. It’s a scam, destroying money for no benefit.
TribblesBestFriend@startrek.website 3 weeks ago
Also this plant are (with the latest technology) really less efficient than trees, like 60-70% less efficient IIRC.
starman2112@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Yeah, and the Wright Flyer could only travel like 30 yards. A 10 megabyte hard drive used to fill an entire room. You can’t build a better machine without building the worse ones first
TribblesBestFriend@startrek.website 3 weeks ago
The goal of this plant isn’t to be a solution : it’s greenwashing. It’s making people believe that capitalism have an answer to climate change
starman2112@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
I never said anything about capitalism. Technological progress continues regardless of economic systems, and this is an early step in carbon sequestration technology. A technology we will still need after we abolish fossil fuels, because we have put more carbon into the carbon cycle than the carbon cycle evolved to handle.
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
Planting trees is only a temporary carbon hold. Also, it takes like 200 trees to offset the carbon for a years worth of driving from a single car.
I do have strong doubts about the usefulness of these fans, though.
Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
Looks like your get the post title
piyuv@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Planting trees doesn’t produce revenue for billionaires and shareholders. This does. Ergo we must produce expensive, over engineered machines to replace trees. Bees are next.
muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Trees are inefficient too but we actually already know what we need to do to ramp up the efficiency of the photosynthesis process in trees with genetic tinkering.
The bigger problem is that we have reached a point where trees aren’t enough anymore. The oceans have acidified. There’s just too much co2 to capture at this point.
McWizard@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Correct me if I’m wrong but as far as I know trees are no real solution. Yes, they take CO2 to grow, but everything is released again when they die and are consumed by bacteria which just didn’t exist a few million years ago. So they only ever store what the forest is made of and not a bit more. They will rot and never ever become coal again. So while it sounds nice to plant a forest and there are other benefits, when if we planted a forest on every inch of the planet it would not solve our problem. Am I wrong here? Tell me!
leftytighty@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
The net new total biomass of the forests would all be captured carbon. Yes dead trees may release it again but the total amount of trees would be higher and act as a large buffer.
the_mighty_kracken@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
That carbon will stay sequestered if the trees are cut down, and the wood is used to build something that lasts for a long time.
Typhoon@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Every bit we capture helps.
gressen@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Not if it’s a distraction from better solutions.