38

This post uses a gift link which may have a view count limit. If it runs out, there is an archived copy of the article

top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Birch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

In 2019, the Swiss start-up, which has raised more than $1bn from investors, predicted it would cut its capture costs from $600 per tonne to roughly $100 per tonne in “another four years”.

In reality the costs are still 2 to 3 times that, closer to $2000 per tonne. And that's not even taking into account the entire running costs of this ridiculous company, only operating their wildly inefficient plants.
If you actually go and divide their 1bn fundraising so far by their a bit over 1000 tonnes removed so far you end up with almost a million dollars spent for every ton of co2 removed, which I know is oversimplified but still shows how ridiculous this entire venture is.

[-] primrosepathspeedrun@anarchist.nexus 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Wait, the solution that relies on basically violating thermodynamics rather than fixing literally anything and mostly existed as an excuse to not fix anything doesn't work?

I'm shocked.

[-] lowleekun@ani.social 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

No no no no no. You just need to believe in the process. We need to be open minded and trust the fact that only new technology™ can save us. Maybe if we would simply give more money to startups.

Don't worry though, after the U.S.'s inevitable complete decline into fascism there will probably be some wars to spread and defend "FREEDOOM". If neoliberalism dies in those wars we maybe have a shot at saving whats left of earth and nature.

You seem to forget fascists can lose to local opposition.

You just need to either get rid of the shitlibs fighting for them or get them to fight against the fascists.

this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2025
38 points (100.0% liked)

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

7393 readers
304 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS