Stripe Climate • Hacker News Board

Re: Stripe Climate

#51

Post by thinkharderdev » Wed, Oct 28, 2020, 4:03 PM UTC

syndacks wrote: post #24

I take serious moral concern with the notion that we can "spend our way out of climate disaster" as these initiatives ultimately suggest. Furthermore, this makes individuals feel better about doing something (having agency). This is a false sense of making a difference; we need sweeping, fundamental changes to address climate change, not at the individual level, but at the state level and beyond.

Those aren't mutually exclusive though. Even in the most optimistic decarbonization scenarios we would still need to start removing CO2 from the atmosphere to avoid >2 degrees of warming.

Re: Stripe Climate

#52

Post by coldpie » Wed, Oct 28, 2020, 4:04 PM UTC

JshWright wrote: post #50

immmmmm wrote: post #30

Removing carbon from the atmosphere is a fight against the second law of thermodynamic. To win a fight against Entropy one needs energy, and typically a lot of. My question is simple: where do we find enough energy to capture the carbon that was emitted during the 200 last years? Because we consume already too much energy i fear..

And until we're fully transitioned to carbon neutral energy, isn't that energy better spent replacing CO2 emitting energy sources?

Who do I give 1% of my profits to to replace a nearby coal plant?

Re: Stripe Climate

#53

Post by joshmanders » Wed, Oct 28, 2020, 4:04 PM UTC

alien1993 wrote: post #39

Yet another way to feel like you're doing something while doing absolutely nothing, or maybe even worse. Keep it up people!

Giving money is doing something.

Re: Stripe Climate

#54

Post by mperham » Wed, Oct 28, 2020, 4:06 PM UTC

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #47

gravitystorm wrote: post #29

Carbon capture is necessary in the long term, for particular emissions that are hard to avoid (like specific industrial processes and parts of agriculture). But while we're still pumping out emissions that can be easily and cheaply displaced today, like coal and gas fired grid electricity, then the money being spent on carbon capture is being spent terribly ineffectively. And globally, we don't have the time or money…

> But while we're still pumping out emissions that can be easily and cheaply displaced today, like coal and gas fired grid electricity Coal and gas fired electricity can be easily and cheaply displaced today? Then why isn't it? I was under the impression that we needed coal + gas still because it wasn't easy or cheap to meet the energy level needs of today with alternatives.

The price of wind and solar is coming down so fast that what didn't work in 2015 is perfectly feasible in 2020. My town's sustainability plan was developed in 2014, passed in 2020 and it's already obsolete. Many organizations are planning today based on data that is already out of date.

Re: Stripe Climate

#55

Post by DennisP » Wed, Oct 28, 2020, 4:08 PM UTC

gravitystorm wrote: post #29

Carbon capture is necessary in the long term, for particular emissions that are hard to avoid (like specific industrial processes and parts of agriculture). But while we're still pumping out emissions that can be easily and cheaply displaced today, like coal and gas fired grid electricity, then the money being spent on carbon capture is being spent terribly ineffectively. And globally, we don't have the time or money…

You're right, but it's a lot harder to account for emission reduction, and offsets based on those are often illusory. For example, you might award carbon offsets for replacing a coal plant with solar, when that would have happened anyway just because the economics worked out better. If you're actually removing carbon from the atmosphere, that's not an issue.

As a matter of government policy, we definitely need to focus on reducing emissions, and a simple way to do that is with a carbon fee. But for voluntary contributions right now, it's not so clearcut.

Re: Stripe Climate

#56

Post by gazelleeatslion » Wed, Oct 28, 2020, 4:08 PM UTC

gazelleeatslion wrote: post #26

WOAH - That logo looks 100% identical to scotch.io. Even the animation... Not suggesting anything but wow what the odds. Great program. Not enough organizations / people prioritizing climate and always great to see efforts by a business. Also, FWIW “Carbon Capture” is a weird space and a bunch of young crazy tech worth looking into for engineer minded folks (direct air capture for example). Lot of love, hate, skeptic…

For the downvotes:

https://scotch.io/tutorials/building-the-new-scotchio-animat...

Re: Stripe Climate

#57

Post by feoren » Wed, Oct 28, 2020, 4:08 PM UTC

syndacks wrote: post #24

I take serious moral concern with the notion that we can "spend our way out of climate disaster" as these initiatives ultimately suggest. Furthermore, this makes individuals feel better about doing something (having agency). This is a false sense of making a difference; we need sweeping, fundamental changes to address climate change, not at the individual level, but at the state level and beyond.

Do you think the existence of these small efforts makes the larger efforts harder or easier? More or less likely?

Re: Stripe Climate

#58

Post by DennisP » Wed, Oct 28, 2020, 4:10 PM UTC

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #47

gravitystorm wrote: post #29

Carbon capture is necessary in the long term, for particular emissions that are hard to avoid (like specific industrial processes and parts of agriculture). But while we're still pumping out emissions that can be easily and cheaply displaced today, like coal and gas fired grid electricity, then the money being spent on carbon capture is being spent terribly ineffectively. And globally, we don't have the time or money…

> But while we're still pumping out emissions that can be easily and cheaply displaced today, like coal and gas fired grid electricity Coal and gas fired electricity can be easily and cheaply displaced today? Then why isn't it? I was under the impression that we needed coal + gas still because it wasn't easy or cheap to meet the energy level needs of today with alternatives.

Well, it can easily be displaced at low market penetration for wind/solar. At high levels, like well over 50%, storage cost starts to be a serious issue.

Re: Stripe Climate

#59

Post by sudhirj » Wed, Oct 28, 2020, 4:13 PM UTC

@orbuch can we get an API to set the percentage for each purchase programmatically? or at least vary it by country? I’d like to increase prices and the percentage for customers from countries who don’t do a good job handing climate change.

Re: Stripe Climate

#60

Post by frank2 » Wed, Oct 28, 2020, 4:17 PM UTC

BlueTemplar wrote: post #13

The history of the carbon removal companies is not good (mostly due to the large incentive to game the measures), and smells of indulgences . However, this industry is still quite young... EDIT : Also this initiative seems to be very research-focused, rather than be just about using already known methods?

>carbon removal . . . smells of indulgences

Do you believe a religious metaphor to be useful for understanding climate change?

Do you believe adding CO2 molecules to the air to be intrinsically sinful with the result that no amount of subsequent removal of CO2 can wash away the sin?