Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We need to take CO2 out of the sky – an overview of climate tech

orbuch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 267 posts

Re: We need to take CO2 out of the sky – an overview of climate tech

#11

Post by beachy »

symplee wrote: post #4

I empathize with people who are trying to help by reducing their footprint. Though I fear it'll all be in vain when a machine is invented that can suck a lifetime's worth of frugality out of the air in a fraction of a second.

Fear instead what will happen if such a machine is ever developed.

Which country(s) will own the machine?

Who will decide what we dial the CO2 back to? You'd think it would be back to pre-industrial times but who knows?

Will regions that have benefited from climate change and can now grow crops be on board? Or will they prefer to keep things as they are?

Re: We need to take CO2 out of the sky – an overview of climate tech

#12

Post by willj »

pstrateman wrote: post #5

1. Plant trees 2. Cut down trees 3. Sink trees to the bottom of a great lake

Trees take about 10 years[1] to reach their peak CO2 consumption. That’s a long time to wait. Also, trees and other plants seem to be decreasing in how much carbon they are absorbing, compared to what they did a decade ago. [2]

[1] http://urbanforestrynetwork.org/benefits/air%20quality.htm [2] https://cosmosmagazine.com/climate/trees-and-plants-reached-...

Re: We need to take CO2 out of the sky – an overview of climate tech

#13

Post by willj »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #6

Why do we always phrase it as changing the climate instead of facing that it's an energy balance issue? Too much energy is entering the earth and getting trapped. We can solve it by letting less enter, or otherwise sinking some of it. Consider if we stored the excess energy as chemical energy? or reflected some fraction of the energy back out away from us? reducing consumption is a failing project and the greener tec…

It’s not just an energy issue. The abundance of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere contributes to ocean acidification.

Re: We need to take CO2 out of the sky – an overview of climate tech

#14

Post by roel_v »

symplee wrote: post #4

I empathize with people who are trying to help by reducing their footprint. Though I fear it'll all be in vain when a machine is invented that can suck a lifetime's worth of frugality out of the air in a fraction of a second.

The article links to a website where you can calculate your footprint, and buy offsets in various programs to negate that footprint (projectwren.com). It would cost me USD 17 / month to offset my (larger than average for my country) footprint. Why do I even bother with my reusable coffee cup and paper straws for that kind of money? I just don't understand. If an extra charge of $10 / month for everyone in Europe would 'solve' the problem, why don't we do it?

Re: We need to take CO2 out of the sky – an overview of climate tech

#16

Post by aetherson »

roel_v wrote: post #14
symplee wrote: post #4

I empathize with people who are trying to help by reducing their footprint. Though I fear it'll all be in vain when a machine is invented that can suck a lifetime's worth of frugality out of the air in a fraction of a second.

The article links to a website where you can calculate your footprint, and buy offsets in various programs to negate that footprint (projectwren.com). It would cost me USD 17 / month to offset my (larger than average for my country) footprint. Why do I even bother with my reusable coffee cup and paper straws for that kind of money? I just don't understand. If an extra charge of $10 / month for everyone in Europe woul…

Marginal costs would increase if hundreds of millions or billions of such offsets were purchased. By how much, I don't know.

Re: We need to take CO2 out of the sky – an overview of climate tech

#17

Post by blackflame7000 »

tommoor wrote: post #9
symplee wrote: post #4

I empathize with people who are trying to help by reducing their footprint. Though I fear it'll all be in vain when a machine is invented that can suck a lifetime's worth of frugality out of the air in a fraction of a second.

It took me months to save $100 as a kid, now seconds of movement on the stock market earns me more money – but I don't regret saving as a kid :)

I don't think the environment pays compound interest then again, what banks do anymore?

Re: We need to take CO2 out of the sky – an overview of climate tech

#19

Post by nullc »

pstrateman wrote: post #5

1. Plant trees 2. Cut down trees 3. Sink trees to the bottom of a great lake

If you do the math, this essentially doesn't work out. :( Trees are far too slow, even if you have a good way to lock up the carbon once the trees capture it.

For an intuitive understanding, consider: Our surplus of CO2 comes (mostly) from burning fossil fuel that took millions of years for the original plant life to accumulate.

Re: We need to take CO2 out of the sky – an overview of climate tech

#20

Post by lacker »

roel_v wrote: post #14
symplee wrote: post #4

I empathize with people who are trying to help by reducing their footprint. Though I fear it'll all be in vain when a machine is invented that can suck a lifetime's worth of frugality out of the air in a fraction of a second.

The article links to a website where you can calculate your footprint, and buy offsets in various programs to negate that footprint (projectwren.com). It would cost me USD 17 / month to offset my (larger than average for my country) footprint. Why do I even bother with my reusable coffee cup and paper straws for that kind of money? I just don't understand. If an extra charge of $10 / month for everyone in Europe woul…

You’re probably correct that your reusable cup and paper straws are ineffective mechanisms for preventing climate change.
Post reply on HN