Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ghiculescu 955 days ago
People on this technology forum seem skeptical that technology can improve or get cheaper.
4 comments

I think they just understand that this is very unlikely to work even with best case estimates from people with a direct financial interest in this working
It’s part of the IEA’s net zero by 2050 plan. An understanding of basic physics is all that is required to see that DAC must be in the mix to achieve net zero emissions globally.
Where is all this energy going to come from? Cause fission is the only thing I’m aware of that we know that can generate enough new electricity capacity to do reclamation. Fusion is too far out and solar/wind can’t handle enough of the grid to have enough left over to also be doing reclamation.

The economic and legal arguments are a joke. The only serious plan would involve 100x or even 1000x our investments in fission R&D and capacity build out (and fusion research too because fission needs to get us there).

Don’t see that happening until the situation getting dire enough and that’s going to be too late because capacity can’t come online fast enough and these are runaway global processes. It’s taken 200 years of really bad destruction and it would take much longer than that running reclamation going at an insane rate to try to undo that damage. Arguably we’re already in runaway territory - We didn’t go to 0 but it was the single largest global reduction in co2 and still one of the worst global warming events we’ve seen so far. Do not expect anything magical from net 0. At this point it’s massively negative 0. That 2c of warming is a dream at this point. I don’t know what the actual number is because the international reports are constantly getting rewritten by politicians because the scientists are just being “too alarming”. It’s a joke.

People on this technology forum are skeptical that an incredibly inefficient technology used to recover carbon from air is a better investment than using technology to emit less carbon in the first place.
Those seem like different goals. Don’t we need both?
Yes. Defense in depth is somehow only applied to computer security around these parts.
This isn't defense in depth, this is deciding what color you want the background of you 'about our security team' webpage, while your system is actively getting compromised.
When there's a giant hole in the bottom of your boat, you don't dispatch your limited resources to start bailing water out with a tablespoon.

You patch the hole. Once you deal with that, then you can start bailing.

It's a defining feature of this place, no optimism is allowed. If it isn't perfect from the start, it can never be good enough.
The first solar panels were completely useless, therefore, it makes no sense that solar panels today are much better. QED