this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
36 points (70.9% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5242 readers
606 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: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world. About 1C of total warming. Second chart: about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability. Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases. About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

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
silence7
36
The ‘world’s largest’ vacuum to suck climate pollution out of the air just opened. Here’s how it works (edition.cnn.com)
submitted 1 month ago by GreeNRG to c/climate
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] solo 20 points 1 month ago (3 children)

It would be great if these approaches would actually contribute in a meaningful way. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be the case.

This is an article with some relevant info:

Climeworks’ “Mammoth” vacuum cleaner is not a solution to the climate crisis

Climeworks’ newest DAC plant, Mammoth, is purported to capture ten times the amount of CO2 as Orca; some 36,000 tonnes of CO2 per year. (...) If 36,000 tonnes sounds like a big number, it’s not: It equates to one one-millionth of our annual global emissions. Even if Climeworks and other DAC companies do build hundreds of these DAC plants, it would not equate to even one per cent of current annual global emissions.

From our world in data on CO~2~ emissions:

we now emit over 35 billion tonnes each year

[–] Nighed@feddit.uk 6 points 1 month ago

It's a small project. Hopefully they make money, then they can build a larger project, all while learning about the processes and engineering involved.

Then later if (when ☹️) we need to scale it we might be able to much easier.

Discarding projects like this is like dismissing solar energy 20 years ago because what impact does that small solar project have?

[–] Mechaguana@programming.dev 3 points 1 month ago

Eh thats 973k machines, 5k to build per country without counting the amount of electricity infrastructure needed (rounded) still too expensive

[–] vxx@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

For comparison, a hectar of trees remove about 10 tons CO2 per year.

A hectar is 100m to 100m.

10 tons is ~22000 lbs

100m is ~330 feet

So a forest of 35 hectar would replace that machine. That's a very small forest that you can cross in 30 minutes by foot.

Trees don't grow where this machine is placed, though.