this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2023
60 points (98.4% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5214 readers
409 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
I don’t think that’s true, can you back up your claim?
I support research and development of the technology, because it’s something which could be useful in the future. But this article is about building carbon capture facilities today, which is a big waste of money.
It's survived till today as a conservative talking point. How solar can't pay off its own manufacturing costs, etc etc. None of it's true, but that's where it started.
R&D does not happen solely in the lab. At some point, you need concrete, full scale examples to work with on ironing out the kinks and figuring out where theory doesn't apply in reality.
We're not building a thousand of these plants. This is the early PoC example that we need to progress the technology.
Sure, I’m happy to support building large scale experimental establishments to test the theories, but that’s not what this is at all. This is a commercial installation in Africa, of all places. Why would the European research teams build a research facility so far away? That doesn’t make sense.
What's the difference between a large scale experimental establishment, and a first of its kind commercial experimental establishment?
As for location, presumably cheap land, power, lack of NIMBYs. Maybe tax incentives.
It’s not the first of its kind though. It’s just the first in Africa. There are already a bunch of these in Europe and America.
If the researchers are in Europe then it doesn’t work for the plant to be in Africa. I don’t know why you’re arguing such an obviously wrong position lol
Yeah scratch the first of its kind, wasn't thinking when I wrote that. Nevertheless, my point stands. For the technology to grow and develop we need PoCs to be constructed. Valuable data can be obtained from operating the PoCs that we wouldn't otherwise get.
In this age where everything is networked and teams can be distributed worldwide, what in the world does it matter if the plant is in Africa? If anything, it would be encouraging knowledge transfer and dissemination.
In most online discussions, that's exactly how the other person feels about you. We generally keep it civil by not saying it out loud, though.
More than 10 years ago solar and wind were talked about very diffrently. They required subsidies to operate and weren't cost effective. We nursed the new technology to commertial viability and everyone forgot about that part