Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cjaybo 932 days ago
> Direct air capture is literally removing carbon from the atmosphere, regardless of what's done with the carbon afterwards

Regardless of what’s done afterwards? Sure, if we arbitrarily decide to ignore the full effects of any system we can make all sorts of fanciful claims. That’s not exactly useful, though.
1 comments
nozzlegear 932 days ago
My point was that Shopify is removing carbon from the atmosphere with their DACs. It’s not their fault if someone then purchases that carbon they removed and decides to shoot it straight back into the atmosphere, or whatever it is you’re concerned about, assuming just anyone can even purchase Shopify’s removed carbon. I suppose we can’t be satisfied until Shopify finds a way to remove the carbon and then ship it off of earth entirely using a space elevator?
link
jona-f 931 days ago
No they are not, they are paying someone to do it someday. Those someone are shady. No carbon is currently removed from the atmosphere. Even when operational it will be a tiny fraction of what they are causing. It's a marketing stunt with no effect on the climate. In fact it makes it worse, cause people then think it's ok to keep consuming.
link
nozzlegear 931 days ago
Your hypothesis is that it’d be better for the planet if Shopify were to remove no carbon from the atmosphere at all? Society as a whole would check the Shopify BFCM dashboard, see that there is no carbon removal metric, and have some kind of epiphany like “wow, Shopify isn’t removing carbon from my purchases, maybe I shouldn’t spend as much this holiday weekend”?

> Those someone are shady.

What makes them shady? I have a feeling you only think they’re shady because they want to do carbon removal, which you’ve unilaterally decided is ineffective.

link