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

Carbon Removal Technologies

carbon.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 682 posts

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#191

Post by aoner »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #5

Can we discuss space sunshades? Assuming the cost of getting freight to orbit goes down substantially as companies like SpaceX ramp up launches, what's the limiting parameter on some sort of sunshade over the north and/or south pole? Is it indeed the cost of launching the sunshade, or are there other factors at play which make the space sunshade unrealistic? What materials would be reflective and resilient and cost-e…

I think geo-engineering will open Pandora's box. On one hand, we need to invest in geo-engineering as a last resort, on the other hand, if people see this as the last resort the problem of CO2 will seem less urgent. Very dangerous stuff.

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#192

Post by egd »

pdonis wrote: post #190

I know this is going to get downvoted but I have to say it: the problem is not CO2, the problem is CO2 alarmism. The models on which the IPCC predictions of doom are based do not match the data. Even the IPCC admits that in the AR5. The actual data says that CO2-driven warming is not enough to worry about. (Not to mention that the prediction of doom also depends on economic models which are even worse at matching dat…

Sources?

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#193

Post by [deleted] »

pdonis wrote: post #190

I know this is going to get downvoted but I have to say it: the problem is not CO2, the problem is CO2 alarmism. The models on which the IPCC predictions of doom are based do not match the data. Even the IPCC admits that in the AR5. The actual data says that CO2-driven warming is not enough to worry about. (Not to mention that the prediction of doom also depends on economic models which are even worse at matching dat…

[deleted]

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#194

Post by canercandan »

What about changing our diets?

> Animal agriculture is responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, more than the combined exhaust from all transportation [1]

Are you will to fund any product ideas that will be willing to encourage a paradigm shift/or smooth shift with regards to a more eco and animal fríendly lifestyle?

[1] http://www.cowspiracy.com/facts/

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#195

Post by xchaotic »

Like any sane person, I totally accept the global warming is real and most likely mostly man made. But rather than fighting that change which is already underway, can we not adapt to the higher temperatures and entropy? I appreciate that there's lots of side effects that we see as disastrous, but generally warmer = better for life in many parts of the earth. Most likely the positive outcomes of global warming do not outweight the negatives, but it looks like relatively very little attention is paid to what is most natural course of action - adaptation.

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#196

Post by greglindahl »

thereisnospork wrote: post #118
astrodust wrote: post #90

At the rate we're setting up for a future where the entire ocean blooms, dies, and we're left with nothing. Already jellyfish are taking over. We're killing off so many life forms we're essentially going back in time to the precambrian era. Instead of looking for "quick fixes" like iron seeding, which has just as much a chance of going awry as Australia importing cane toads to deal with their crop insects, let's just…

Sure we could curtail CO2 emissions, but that means lowering people's quality of life which is a hard sell.

Do all methods of curtailing CO2 emissions lower people's quality of life?

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#197

Post by alkonaut »

natosaichek wrote: post #13
WhompingWindows wrote: post #5

Can we discuss space sunshades? Assuming the cost of getting freight to orbit goes down substantially as companies like SpaceX ramp up launches, what's the limiting parameter on some sort of sunshade over the north and/or south pole? Is it indeed the cost of launching the sunshade, or are there other factors at play which make the space sunshade unrealistic? What materials would be reflective and resilient and cost-e…

Anything you can do in space would be cheaper on earth. So rather than shading the pole by spreading ~100,000 sq. km of material in orbit, instead ask why we wouldn't spread the same shade cloth / reflective mylar etc. on the surface of the earth. Then you realize how much of a colossal project it is and how completely impractical is is.

The easiest surfaces to make more reflecting should be the oceans. Some proposed carbon capture methods involve algae. Maybe algae could be synthesized that are white/reflective as well as capture carbon? Patches of algae can be huge without the need for any construction.

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#198

Post by jasonlaramburu »

The post mentions the significant logistical challenges associated with moving large quantities of biomass and biochar. What about a mobile biochar production system? ie a device that could be delivered to a farm and towed through the field to convert waste biomass in-situ into biochar and till it directly into soil?

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#199

Post by moultano »

xchaotic wrote: post #195

Like any sane person, I totally accept the global warming is real and most likely mostly man made. But rather than fighting that change which is already underway, can we not adapt to the higher temperatures and entropy? I appreciate that there's lots of side effects that we see as disastrous, but generally warmer = better for life in many parts of the earth. Most likely the positive outcomes of global warming do not…

We will have to adapt, even if we mobilize to remake the entire energy economy. It is too late to prevent a lot of warming from occurring.

If we do nothing however, we are headed for things we cannot adapt to. The worst case is not rising seas and famine, the worst case is the Permian-Triassic Extinction.

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#200

Post by strainer »

btilly wrote: post #59

I would strongly suggest investigating the claims of http://www.innovationconcepts.eu/res/literatuurSchuiling/oli... that after mining, milling, and then being spread in the ocean, olivine rocks weather quickly and take out CO2. The estimated costs of large scale CO2 sequestration this way are surprisingly reasonable, and the technology is already available. Also the various ocean technologies are going to run into t…

> nobody wants to accept a bad outcome, but in this case I think it is better than the alternative.

I don't like this reasoning because when it comes to environmental effects we've always had individual firm expectations but we haven't known, we didn't know and we still don't know.

But I do believe the growing crisis demands urgent research and gradual early implementation of a range of projects like ocean seeding, and others which may be opposed by a most skeptical portion of the environmental movement. But when there are doubts about the details of potentially massive eco-engineering projects, please dont write them up as 'qualms of environmentalists' The movement has broadcast for decades the crisis we face today, helped in many situations and hindered very few - it was never truly characterized by sentimentality.

Post reply on HN