logoalt Hacker News

LogicFailsMeyesterday at 9:13 PM2 repliesview on HN

Alternatives exist but they aren't free...

https://www.aga.org/decarbonizing-through-carbon-capture/

https://www.energyindepth.org/study-finds-carbon-capture-and...

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S277265682...

TIL mentioning a viable technology that would reduce emissions here but delay a forced transition to renewables is an instant downvote.


Replies

defrosttoday at 3:14 AM

Viable?

Currently the largest carbon capture and storage (CCS) project on the planet has failed to meet it's goals. Had it actually met the design goals it would be part of an LNG power source that manages to reclaim only 80% of the CO2 it releases.

That's not net zero, it falls short, and that's a good attempt but hardly viable.

The desired goal is to eliminate further emissions and also go further and claw back some of those gigatonnes of previously sequestered CO2 released by humans over the past century.

* A climate solution or distraction? - https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-11-18/chevron-gorgon-fails-...

* ‘A shocking failure’: Chevron criticised for missing carbon capture target - https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/20/a-shocki...

acdhatoday at 2:53 AM

Carbon capture gets downvotes because it’s not working anywhere at scale. The fossil fuel industry loves it because it’s saying they get paid now and maybe someone else gets paid later, and their industry doesn’t have profits cut, but anyone planning to continue living on earth would prefer we stop polluting now because that is proven to actually work at scale.