I can't wait until they makes these no cost, low-maintenance, and self-replacing. Oh man, just think of how easy it would be to fix our climate issues!
this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2025
404 points (93.3% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
13653 readers
398 users here now
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article
--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Only need half a million of them to keep up with current emissions.
For comparison, there are far fewer power plants that release co2. Based on some rough estimates I foind, there are fewer than 10,000 in total plants, most have more than one generator.
And those turn a profit, no one is going to fund half a million capture plants. Building out more solar and wind is insanely more financially prudent. N.
Over building with nuclear power with its massive capital costs makes far more sense than these things.
These solutions always remind of this scene from Futurma.
Honestly, my staunch conservationists viewpoints aside, tech just isn't as cheap or as efficient (holistically) as biological systems, or simply not destroying these systems.
All solutions like this do are to highlight my point, and the inherent value ecosystems have. However since plants don't make the line go up no one gives a shit or wants to look at the writing on the wall
This is how I have felt. I have never come across one of these where they can say it removes for carbon than are put in by a polluting source of electricity. The numbers you point out is also I hate when geoengineering comes up. The number of planes that you have to regularly fly to cloud seed or such and thats if it actually somehow worked and did not have some other bad effect. Its like we can visit these if we are pretty much at 100% not polluting. At that point maybe tech to reduce might make sense. might.
Developing this technology isn't a bad idea, since we'll need it to reduce damage in the future, but it isn't the solution we need to be focusing on.