Preferences

> The only viable carbon removal technology yet identified is leaving it in the ground.

The article discusses this point in the second paragraph.

> We're now in "Phase 2" and stopping climate change requires both emission reduction and removing CO2 from the atmosphere. "Phase 2" is occurring faster and hotter than we thought. If we don't act soon, we'll end up in "Phase 3" and be too late for both of these strategies to work.


That is far from discussing.

Do you think the political part of the problem will magically go away if there is a viable phase 3 technology that does not contribute more carbon than it captures?

Do you think the politicians will permit it to be used at scale when they have done all possible to slow renewables?

This item has no comments currently.

Keyboard Shortcuts

Story Lists

j
Next story
k
Previous story
Shift+j
Last story
Shift+k
First story
o Enter
Go to story URL
c
Go to comments
u
Go to author

Navigation

Shift+t
Go to top stories
Shift+n
Go to new stories
Shift+b
Go to best stories
Shift+a
Go to Ask HN
Shift+s
Go to Show HN

Miscellaneous

?
Show this modal