• HubertManne@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    the excess needs to be so great for carbon capture as to be practically free. fusion requires tritium and its not as easy to get as people think.

    • Dogyote@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well we’ll just build more energy production? Small reactors, big reactors, renewables, fusion, whatever. What choice do we really have?

      • HubertManne@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        there is limits to it all though and we have to meet our energy needs in the interum. capturing carbon is way more intensive than not using it to begin with. I doubt that we will every realy be able to do it. Sometimes things are not a choice but just a reality. We will do what we can and live or worse not with what is. Its the whole reason the graph is scary.

        • Dogyote@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t understand why you want to win this argument. Do you want me to give up all hope? You haven’t convinced me of your position, so I won’t. Yes, it’s possible you’re right, but there will be advances in the field we can’t predict at this time plus we’re adding more and more low carbon energy to our capacity every day. It’s just a matter of outrunning our demand. It’s totally possible to get a grip on this problem and get ahead of it.

          • HubertManne@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No worries. Its fine for people to have differing viewpoints and we don’t have to convice each other. I wish I could have yours honestly but for me the math just does not add up. There are some technologies that are possible to mitigate it but none might even materialize. AI (to get us to scifi level stuff), mind uploading, maybe genetic engineering. There are even a few that have come to mind at times that I can’t recall now (actually just recalled one which is channeling heat right into space). but wind, solar, nuclear, tidal, etc combined with population combined with consumption. It won’t work and that is not even taking into account carbon capture to bring it back to normal which as the one guy said requires virtually limitless energy. I mean it will take more energy than what we got from fossil fuels to bring it back to neutral and that is a lot of energy.

            • Dogyote@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m starting to think you don’t want it to work. All of the mentioned factors can be altered and your numbers are constantly in flux, constantly improving. Now don’t assume I’m naive, it’ll get worse before it gets better, but it’ll get better. This is a multigenerational undertaking and progress will look excruciatingly slow to us poor mortals living in the endeavor’s first generation.

              • HubertManne@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Want has nothing to do with it. We have had massive increase in technology in the last 50 years yet we have not even slowed down our damage. You have to understand we are just talking global warming as well and that is more of an easily measurable bad consequence of pollution in general. Overfishing, air, water, soil contamination, over farming, overpopulation. Those still all exist. I have not gotten through life by wants. If I did then the world would be like star trek because that is what I would want. That is fantasy though. Look we want to do everything we can but to be realistic that is to minimize suffering at this point, because suffering is happening now from pollution and global warming. We need to reduce, reuse, recycle, and research ways to mitigate and if by some chance we get that sci fi level stuff we need to actually get out of this mess then great.

                • Dogyote@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You’re clearly overwhelmed. Everything you mentioned is being addressed and things will be okay.

                  • HubertManne@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I think we live in two different worlds. In mine renewables usage is going up for economic reasons and so is coal usage. There is a lot of talk around bad fishing and farming practices but little put into practice. Recycling is often not happening especially with plastics which are increasing in usage. We have been tracking closer to the worst case scenario in past global warming predictions than in best case. I do not see things being addressed much. Don’t get me wrong there are many many people trying their hardest to do the best they can but globally, governmentally. I do soee things being addressed adequately. I see a lot of talk. That being said I don’t work off of wants or fears. Things just are and I just try to do the best I individually can and practice mindfulness and acceptance. The old have serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.