News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The impact of direct air carbon capture on climate change by AnthonyMouse on Thursday November 21, 2019 @08:11PM (#21601553)
The cost to ordinary people would actually be relatively minor. You buy an electric car instead of a gasoline one. The average new car price in the US is ~$36,000. A new Nissan Leaf starts below $30,000, Model 3 only a little more than that. Replace coal with alternatives. We can do at least as well as nuclear, which is barely any more expensive than coal has been. Best case is that storage gets a lot cheaper than it is and then the price of electricity goes down from the historical norm.

Capture could cost as little as zero. Renewables inherently have to build over-capacity to compensate for intermittency, but that means there are days when they generate more power than there is demand. Use the rest for carbon capture and it's free.

The real "cost" to fixing it, and the big lobby against it, is that the oil and coal companies would take a nosedive. Literally trillions of dollars in lost revenue. It moves to alternatives. It isn't economic damage, it's displacement. But the specific people who own the oil and coal reserves stand to lose their shirts, and these are not people lacking in political influence. Everything you hear about the high cost -- it's only really a cost to them. To you it's just an upgrade to electric.

But we still have to actually do it. A carbon tax so that people do all buy electric cars and stop burning coal. It's a thing we can do but not a thing we have done yet.

Re:The impact of direct air carbon capture on climate change by aidenn0 on Thursday November 21, 2019 @11:40PM (#21602531)
The point of the Vox article is that just switching from gas to electric isn't going to be enough. The argument is that without large-scale carbon capture we will not hit the 1.5C goal.

Large-scale carbon capture is still untested. Reforestation is the only well established large-scale carbon capture but is very land intensive.

Re:The impact of direct air carbon capture on climate change by pinkfoot on Friday November 22, 2019 @12:54AM (#21603143)
Spekboom (Portulacaria afra) is said to sequester up 10 times the carbon of a rain forest by area.

This is largely due to a special mechanism that continues photosynthesis at night.

And it grows best in semi-arid regions.

Where people don't live or farm.

Re:The impact of direct air carbon capture on climate change by riffraff on Friday November 22, 2019 @04:57AM (#21604266)
interesting, the Portulaca Oleracea is edible, I wonder if it has the same property and whether we should plant a ton of it.
Re:The impact of direct air carbon capture on climate change by pinkfoot on Friday November 22, 2019 @08:28AM (#21605342)
Wikipedia sais it does:

"P. oleracea is one of very few plants able to utilize both CAM and C4 photosynthesis pathways, for a long time believed to be incompatible with each other despite biochemical similarities. P. oleracea will switch from C4 to CAM pathways during times of drought and there is transcription regulation and physiological evidence for C4-CAM hybrid photosynthesis during mild drought."