Wired argues that while there have been announcements about the possibility of usable carbon removal technologies at an affordable cost they are being hyped to the point where we may not take any action to mitigate the damage we are doing.
Scientists have long speculated that so-called "negative emissions" technologies like CO2 removal could not only slow the accumulation of carbon in the air, but even reverse it. Before last week, though, all that speculation was, well, largely speculative; nobody had convincingly demonstrated how to pull off negative emissions at scale. Previous estimates had pegged the cost of sucking carbon from the skies, for instance, at $600 per ton—way too pricey to qualify as a viable cleanup solution. The findings from Carbon Engineering, which appear in the latest issue of the journal Joule, point the way toward a future in which negative emissions are not only technically possible but financially feasible.
So yeah—it's big, significant, encouraging news. But it's not all blue skies and rainbows.
|For the Earth to Remain Human-Habitable, Carbon Emissions Must Be Brought to "Near Zero" by 2100|
|“In comparison to the waste produced by every other kind of electricity production, that quantity is close to zero.”|
|"We are now entering the sixth great mass extinction event."|
|"Essentially, we ended up with an antacid for the stratosphere."|
|"Climate change has moved from a distant threat to a present-day danger."|
|How to Avoid Jury Duty|
|Why, Typewriters Are Alive and Well, Thank you|
|Flying into Pape station. #ttc|
|Fall is Coming|
|Das Berliner Buchstabenmuseum|
|On Building Your Own Trebuchet|
|Bird Shit Advertising|
|The (Very Scary) People of Public Transit|
|Japanese Robot Serves Ice Cream From Inside a Vending Machine|
|Revolution Islam Hacked|
|Go the Fuck to Sleep: A Children's Bedtime Book|