31–40 of 282 posts
The missing thing: international incentive structures. Today, most things are done the most economical way. And that might involve emitting carbon. A country which regulates the emissions of carbon will end up producing goods and services using carbon free methods - but those methods will often be less economically efficient than the carbon producing method, even at scale. So any country that goes all in on the carbo…
The only thing that would move the needle on a massive societal level is reliable nuclear energy in every city and country. But is that too hard for startups to tackle? Or it doesn’t fit the narrative? Every other climate “tech” just nibbles at the margins if that even. And the byproduct of mass nuclear energy adoption would be that the issue is solved and there would be no more climate mongering amongst the conferen…
Why do people keep spouting this nonsense? Yes there is a place for nuclear in the mix, but renewables have already moved the dial in a lot if countries. I the uk about 40% of our energy is from renewables, mostly wind at 25% and biomass for much of the rest. Or does that not fit your narrative? Or do you not consider that moving the needle? It's a damn sight easier, quicker and cheaper to put up wind turbines and so…
Solar and wind occupy way more land for the same power production and can’t produce baseload power without battery storage systems that cost 5x as much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do people keep spouting this nonsense? Yes there is a place for nuclear in the mix, but renewables have already moved the dial in a lot if countries. I the uk about 40% of our energy is from renewables, mostly wind at 25% and biomass for much of the rest. Or does that not fit your narrative? Or do you not consider that moving the needle? It's a damn sight easier, quicker and cheaper to put up wind turbines and so…
The core issue is that they are unreliable when there is no wind or sunlight. Storage at scale is still not affordable or available for the whole world. The recent electricity issues that western Europe faced are indicative of the failings of unSustainable energy.
Nuclear energy can't solve the problem on its own either, because you still need plants to deal with rapid changes in demand. We shouldn't be working towards a silver bullet, we should be using a lot of different technologies together to solve the problem.
> Tesla for home appliances: re-inventing home appliances (water heaters, induction stoves, clothes dryers, etc) to create better consumer experiences using specific advantages of electric technology. > Tesla-like experience for home energy management: smart hub, including smart charging, load shifting, software-based load shedding for improved resiliency, and better circuit-level energy use measurement. With how Tes…
Tesla is indeed a strange choice for a simile, considering that Tesla cars use prodigious amounts of energy compared to other electric cars, or other cars in general. I doubt they're even more environmentally friendly overall than a compact combustion engine car. Tesla made electric cool by building an over the top luxury car, what we really need is the opposite.
The only thing that would move the needle on a massive societal level is reliable nuclear energy in every city and country. But is that too hard for startups to tackle? Or it doesn’t fit the narrative? Every other climate “tech” just nibbles at the margins if that even. And the byproduct of mass nuclear energy adoption would be that the issue is solved and there would be no more climate mongering amongst the conferen…
Why do people keep spouting this nonsense? Yes there is a place for nuclear in the mix, but renewables have already moved the dial in a lot if countries. I the uk about 40% of our energy is from renewables, mostly wind at 25% and biomass for much of the rest. Or does that not fit your narrative? Or do you not consider that moving the needle? It's a damn sight easier, quicker and cheaper to put up wind turbines and so…
As I understand it, a substantial portion of the biomass is wood pellets. These are harvested from the American south causing deforestation, are transported over the ocean with non-negligible emissions, and then burned in non-clean stacks releasing carbon, but they are accounted for as green. So you get a dirty burn, dirty transportation, and deforest a region as part of these numbers.
A quick search turned up this article: https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2021/07/us/american-south-bi...
Its hard for me to accept that this narrative is correct, but I've struggled to find anything that explains how EU's biomass is net good for the environment. Do you have any insight?
Lately i've been thinking that right now may be a great time to start an oil company. Cost of solar is going down so capturing c02 and turning it into fuel is looking like a viable option. People would pay a premiun for carbon neutral fuel. Most climate companies, focused on carbon capture, tried to make the most efficient carbon capture possible, but what if one focused on scalability and reducing manufacturing cost…
This is the play that Terraform Industries is engaging in as well. Cost for synthesizing a unit of methane from atmospheric CO2 and water using solar power is set to drop lower than the cost of drilling it out of the ground. https://terraformindustries.com/
I'm confused, I searched for both "crypto" and "web3" on that page and there are no results?
> Tesla for home appliances: re-inventing home appliances (water heaters, induction stoves, clothes dryers, etc) to create better consumer experiences using specific advantages of electric technology. > Tesla-like experience for home energy management: smart hub, including smart charging, load shifting, software-based load shedding for improved resiliency, and better circuit-level energy use measurement. With how Tes…
The way I see it when talking about Tesla it’s talking about the pre/post Tesla (aka the transition from ICE to EV in all auto makers) and not the build quality of Tesla per se !
Lately i've been thinking that right now may be a great time to start an oil company. Cost of solar is going down so capturing c02 and turning it into fuel is looking like a viable option. People would pay a premiun for carbon neutral fuel. Most climate companies, focused on carbon capture, tried to make the most efficient carbon capture possible, but what if one focused on scalability and reducing manufacturing cost…
https://www.twelve.co is doing this (with fuels as well as other carbon-derived chemicals). Trouble is, this is carbon recycling, not carbon sequestering. It's better than the status quo, but I'm more excited about ideas that either sequester GHGs permanently or replace industrial GHG-generating processes permanently.
Yes, sequestration can go negative-carbon, but that doesn't help anybody who has a difficult to replace fuel burning process.