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

Stripe Climate

stripe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 227 posts

Re: Stripe Climate

#81

Post by defterGoose »

antr wrote: post #77
abalone wrote: post #73

The only realistic solution to carbon removal is massive government investment, like most other major Silicon Valley core technologies. We need the Green New Deal. Anything less is posturing. I would even go so far as to say that on an issue of this importance, where we have maybe a decade left to turn the tide, giving the impression that private enterprise can solve it is irresponsible. Put those donations into GND…

I'm an energy investor (primarily focused on renewables), and I couldn't disagree more. I could go on an on with examples of how government intervention has created busts across the renewables space for the past 20 years, and has thrown down the drain billions of tax payer money. I'd like to keep governments out of something that works without them.

It almost certainly doesnt though, and your personal experience over the last two decades or whatever probably means squat.

If the US government is/was capable of succeeding with the Manhattan and Apollo projects, there's no reason to believe that the same wouldn't be true of similar gargantuan efforts today.

I'm not saying that the US can solve AGCC by itself, but I am saying that uncoordinated efforts by loosely coupled private entities cannot.

Re: Stripe Climate

#83

Post by defterGoose »

lefrenchy wrote: post #78
abalone wrote: post #73

The only realistic solution to carbon removal is massive government investment, like most other major Silicon Valley core technologies. We need the Green New Deal. Anything less is posturing. I would even go so far as to say that on an issue of this importance, where we have maybe a decade left to turn the tide, giving the impression that private enterprise can solve it is irresponsible. Put those donations into GND…

Sadly I think far too many people will not evaluate the Green New Deal on it's actual merits and instead write it off because Bernie Sanders, AOC, and others have written/supported it. The strife and division we are seeing in the US will be a significant impact to climate action. We've already seen its impact on something as simple as mask wearing becoming politicized and difficult to coordinate on.

I can only hope that those driving the division (older people) will be dead soon, so that the younger generations who are by and large more eco-friendly can get on with the difficult work that needs to be done.

Its past time for the old, rotten way of thinking to be plowed under.

Re: Stripe Climate

#84

Post by lefrenchy »

antr wrote: post #77
abalone wrote: post #73

The only realistic solution to carbon removal is massive government investment, like most other major Silicon Valley core technologies. We need the Green New Deal. Anything less is posturing. I would even go so far as to say that on an issue of this importance, where we have maybe a decade left to turn the tide, giving the impression that private enterprise can solve it is irresponsible. Put those donations into GND…

I'm an energy investor (primarily focused on renewables), and I couldn't disagree more. I could go on an on with examples of how government intervention has created busts across the renewables space for the past 20 years, and has thrown down the drain billions of tax payer money. I'd like to keep governments out of something that works without them.

Private investment makes companies go bust too, that's not isolated to government intervention.

But honestly how well is this really working without governments? We're running out of time by certain metrics.

Re: Stripe Climate

#85

Post by ishjoh »

jl2718 wrote: post #65

Sorry, but this feel-goodism around carbon capture doesn’t work. They paid $775/ton. Coal is $30/ton. Those are not carbon-free facilities and salaries. Capture requires energy that could be used to reduce carbon emissions demand. 2nd law of thermodynamics says you can’t win this game. The best carbon capture technology is plants and plankton. The best carbon strategy is to use less. Buying offsets feels like peniten…

My optimism for carbon capture is because it allows a politics free Arbitrage opportunity. Generating hydro electric power in Canada to capture CO2 is a real opportunity, and yes today it is far too expensive, but as more research is done technology is improved those prices will come down.

My pessimism for a political solution hinges on the fact that the leading CO2 producers in the world are unlikely to agree on drastic CO2 cuts:

China: 28% USA: 15% India: 7% Russia: 5%

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/each-countrys-share-co2-emi...

Re: Stripe Climate

#86

Post by ianmobbs »

antr wrote: post #77
abalone wrote: post #73

The only realistic solution to carbon removal is massive government investment, like most other major Silicon Valley core technologies. We need the Green New Deal. Anything less is posturing. I would even go so far as to say that on an issue of this importance, where we have maybe a decade left to turn the tide, giving the impression that private enterprise can solve it is irresponsible. Put those donations into GND…

I'm an energy investor (primarily focused on renewables), and I couldn't disagree more. I could go on an on with examples of how government intervention has created busts across the renewables space for the past 20 years, and has thrown down the drain billions of tax payer money. I'd like to keep governments out of something that works without them.

An energy investor who doesn't support the GND? What a surprise

Re: Stripe Climate

#87

Post by lefrenchy »

defterGoose wrote: post #83
lefrenchy wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly I think far too many people will not evaluate the Green New Deal on it's actual merits and instead write it off because Bernie Sanders, AOC, and others have written/supported it. The strife and division we are seeing in the US will be a significant impact to climate action. We've already seen its impact on something as simple as mask wearing becoming politicized and difficult to coordinate on.

I can only hope that those driving the division (older people) will be dead soon, so that the younger generations who are by and large more eco-friendly can get on with the difficult work that needs to be done. Its past time for the old, rotten way of thinking to be plowed under.

I'm not entirely convinced older people are driving the division.

Re: Stripe Climate

#88

Post by kitbrennan »

DennisP wrote: post #55
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 foc…

> 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

It depends on which organisation verifies your offset, but the big three (Gold Standard, Verra VCS, and United Nations), all require _additionality_. That is where you have to prove that the offset financing is making the project happen, rather than market forces.

It’s not a flawless process, but in many cases offsetting is helping to accelerate the transition away from carbon intensive emitters.

Re: Stripe Climate

#89

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

abalone wrote: post #73

The only realistic solution to carbon removal is massive government investment, like most other major Silicon Valley core technologies. We need the Green New Deal. Anything less is posturing. I would even go so far as to say that on an issue of this importance, where we have maybe a decade left to turn the tide, giving the impression that private enterprise can solve it is irresponsible. Put those donations into GND…

It seems pretty unlikely that a very specific bundle of proposed legislation is the only way to address climate change. Are all other countries doomed to failure because they don't have the Green New Deal?
Post reply on HN