scotty_dont t1_j5vlgzw wrote
Reply to comment by CultFuse in Researchers unveil the least costly carbon capture system to date - down to $39 per metric ton. by PNNL
Each of those “dollars” of input to do the carbon capture are coming from a system that releases carbon. The materials to build the plant, the transport of those materials, the transport for the people to run and maintain it, the clothes on their back, the food on their plate, the bank where their salary is deposited, the studio that makes the movies they watch etc. All those processes release carbon.
You can’t just look locally and say “well, I have green energy capturing carbon so this must be a net positive” because a lot of the carbon cost is externalized. You need to reduce the carbon footprint of a dollar of economic activity.
Otherwise you will be sitting there confused why atmospheric carbon is still increasing despite you building more and more capture systems.
CultFuse t1_j5vnswe wrote
That's another point I hadn't considered but it seems like we should have the means to do all of that without causing more carbon emissions. Money can't be the reason we don't do it, that's a copout.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments