Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Tearakan t1_j5xakw8 wrote

Oh I know. But that's literally 2 trillion less in profit for the capitalists controlling all of our governments.

That's less short term economic growth.

We would still need to not use the methanol fuel or we just dump the CO2 in the atmosphere again.


realbakingbish t1_j5xiesw wrote

Cycling carbon from the atmosphere into our fuel, burning that fuel, and releasing the same carbon back into the atmosphere is still substantially better than pumping new carbon out of the ground and burning that into the atmosphere. It’s not perfect or ideal, but it’s still so much better than what we’ve got now.


Tearakan t1_j5xik2q wrote

The issue is we literally can't use that fuel to actually bring the carbon back out of the atmosphere. We run in laws of thermodynamics that stop us there.

Burning something that creates co2 and then using said energy to recapture it will end up in a net energy loss.


realbakingbish t1_j5xj2vq wrote

It’s not a complete solution on its own, you’re correct there. Combined with renewables and nuclear power to help minimize the use of fossil fuels in energy generation, there may be actual possibilities.

We’re decades out from the “perfect” solution to climate issues, so in the meantime, we have to continue investigating and researching solutions and finding ways to combine and utilize existing technologies to the end goal of minimizing carbon output for our existing societal needs, including energy, food production, transportation, etc.

It’s a multifaceted issue.


checkwarrantystatus t1_j60obz6 wrote

Really we just need to convince the capitalists that they too can have a piece of the new $2 trillion carbon capture biz.


Tearakan t1_j60pdqx wrote

That's not enough. As indicated by scientists effectively screaming that we are heading towards doom and our emmisions literally got higher than ever before in 2022.