Because if the solution isnt actually stopping emissions its basically a feel good scam with no long term sustainability
this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2025
27 points (90.9% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
7278 readers
302 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Ultimately it is a solution for one aspect of the problem, but not a panacea on its own. Yes we have to stop putting carbon into the atmosphere. But we also have to remove it. We could let geology take its time to do that for us, but we'd have a difficult hundred or so millennia in the interim. Might as well try to soak it all back up (powered by non-polluting forms of energy).
CCS has only been proposed by Exxon and others at a very small scale, purely for marketing purposes, so they can say they are helping to capture carbon dioxide and help the climate. It's just like the "how can you reduce your individual footprint" stuff, where the real answer is "vote out the corrupt politicians owned by Big Oil, and force oil executives to face consequences for what they've done to the planet". Dropping this here, please share.
Carbon Capture and sequestration should be able to remove about one rounding errors worth of carbon per year.
It should, but will not. What it will do is increase profits marginally milking fed dollars for test projects that go over budget and over timeframe without working, and without them actually trying.
Since Bush at least they have been funding this stuff. Technohopium to justify biz as usual.
Carbon storage is a boondoggle and a distraction.
Yeah, you bury the carbon and release the oxygen molecules
We can always bury it deep down inside and never deal with it like we do with atmospheric CO2. Maybe transition 3 or 4 coal plants to “natural” gas and have brands sponsor logging company efforts to “plant trees.”
For anyone still typing “CO2“ instead of CO₂: Just put “CO₂” into your text replacement, autocorrect, espanso config or whatever and get taken seriously. please? #CO₂ #FFS