silence7@slrpnk.netM to Climate@slrpnk.netEnglish · edit-21 month agoIf we want to use Direct Air Captur to limit overall warming to 1.5°C, while emitting enough to reach 2.5°C, DAC would need to use something like 30% of all electricity consumed over the next 80 yearsmessage-squaremessage-square12linkfedilinkarrow-up136arrow-down11
arrow-up135arrow-down1message-squareIf we want to use Direct Air Captur to limit overall warming to 1.5°C, while emitting enough to reach 2.5°C, DAC would need to use something like 30% of all electricity consumed over the next 80 yearssilence7@slrpnk.netM to Climate@slrpnk.netEnglish · edit-21 month agomessage-square12linkfedilink
minus-squaresilence7@slrpnk.netOPMlinkfedilinkarrow-up4arrow-down1·1 month agoIf this was the only limit (its not), and you were willing to dump large parts of economic output into something which isnt turning a profit. Those are really big issues
minus-squaresilence7@slrpnk.netOPMlinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down1·1 month agoHow about total cost of all goods and services. Pretty standard GDP way.
minus-squarephutatorius@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 month agoSo break all the windows in your neighborhood and the GDP goes up?
minus-squareryannathans@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 month agoSounds like a good way to stimulate significant parts of the economy, infrastructure-like projects generally do
minus-squaresilence7@slrpnk.netOPMlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 month agoIts a lot cheaper and broader to avoid burning fossil fuels in the first place.
minus-squareryannathans@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down1·1 month agoIs it actually cheaper? If so should be easy to subsidise the greener options
minus-squaresilence7@slrpnk.netOPMlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·edit-21 month agoYes. By a lot. In almost all applications. The problem is that the fossil fuels industry holds a lot of political power and uses it to block shifting off fossil fuels
If this was the only limit (its not), and you were willing to dump large parts of economic output into something which isnt turning a profit. Those are really big issues
Can you define economic output
How about total cost of all goods and services. Pretty standard GDP way.
So break all the windows in your neighborhood and the GDP goes up?
Sounds like a good way to stimulate significant parts of the economy, infrastructure-like projects generally do
Its a lot cheaper and broader to avoid burning fossil fuels in the first place.
Is it actually cheaper? If so should be easy to subsidise the greener options
Yes. By a lot. In almost all applications.
The problem is that the fossil fuels industry holds a lot of political power and uses it to block shifting off fossil fuels