Comment on Capturing CO2 With Copper, Scientists Generate 'Green Methane'
RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 2 months agoIf it can be done cheaper this way…
That “if” is doing a lot lot of heavy lifting, and exactly the excuse a lot of fossil fuel companies and municipalities will use for inaction.
ericjmorey@lemmy.world 2 months ago
If it can’t be cost effective it won’t happen. It won’t slow down solar or other green house gas emission neutral options. I’m not rooting for that scenario.
RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
That’s the thing, it doesn’t have to happen. It has to catch enough headlines that Shell can say:
“As part of our environmental commitments we plan to sell only carbon neutral methane by 2040”
Then they proceed to do nothing in the “hopes” that this becomes cost effective in time, while continuing to invest in natural gas infrastructure, and while we continue to investing in using their “soon to be neutral” fuel.
Finally, when 2035 or so rolls around they quietly shift the goal posts and we keep on letting them pollute.
And if you’re wondering why this sounds familiar…
carbonbrief.org/shell-abandons-2035-emissions-tar…
All getting hyped about CCS or “renewable” “drop-in replacements” for fossil fuels does is further entrench fossil fuel companies as the “center” of our carbon commitments, while they are 100% disincentivized to act.
Unless this tech is paired with a $1000/tonne carbon tax, its a scapegoat.
ericjmorey@lemmy.world 2 months ago
We don’t need Shell to install solar arrays. Thinking that the companies that are causing the problem will fix it for us is what will delay indefinitely any solution. Being able to synthesize methane has no or not has no influence on whether or not a carbon tax is appropriate. Greenhouse gass emission taxes are appropriate under either circumstance.