this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2024
52 points (98.1% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5292 readers
673 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
tl;dr - it's sequestration, not reduction. Liquify it and pump it underground.
They don't capture all the emitted CO2, so it's a reduction.
It's not reducing the amount of co2 generated from making the cement. It still generates the same amount, they just take some of it and pump it into the ground.
I think we're in agreement, just using terms in slightly different ways.
To me, carbon reduction means you have modified the process in some way that it generates less carbon while producing the same (or functionally identical) product. That is how we fight climate change.
Generating the same amount of carbon but just putting it somewhere else is putting a bandage on gangrene. It makes it look better, but the infection is still festering underneath. In this case, making it a problem for future generations so the current generation doesn't have to sacrifice anything.