Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #535466 > unrolled thread

Meeting a Global Carbon Limit Is Cheaper Than Avoiding One

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Meeting a Global Carbon Limit Is Cheaper Than Avoiding One Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 15:32 -0600
    Re: Meeting a Global Carbon Limit Is Cheaper Than Avoiding One jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-25 23:47 +0000
    Re: Meeting a Global Carbon Limit Is Cheaper Than Avoiding One gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-25 23:34 -0600

#535466 — Meeting a Global Carbon Limit Is Cheaper Than Avoiding One

Meeting a Global Carbon Limit Is Cheaper Than Avoiding One
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/meeting-a-global-carbon-limit-is-cheaper-than-avoiding-one/


> Can we do it? Climate scientist James E. Hansen has made a compelling
> case that we could pull 100 billion tons of carbon from the air by
> massive reforestation—limiting land use enough to allow forests to
> grow back to their extent before human deforestation. That, along
> with reducing carbon emissions by several percent a year, which is
> challenging but doable, could meet the 2° C stabilization target.
>
> History is replete with preemptive declarations of infeasibility that
> proved misguided. As Joe Romm of the Center for American Progress
> said in response to climate critics, “Thank goodness these pundits
> weren't around when we had to do something really difficult, like
> suffer millions of casualties and remake our entire economy almost
> overnight to win World War II.” An inspired agreement at the COP21
> climate summit in Paris this month could kick-start an ambitious but
> entirely feasible effort.
>
> The key factor is that there are technological innovations and
> economies of scale that emerge only in the course of actually doing
> something. The price of solar cells globally, for example, has
> dropped by more than 50 percent over the past several years as China
> has ramped up production. Those who say “no we can't” are engaging in
> self-fulfilling prophecy. The U.S. has never been a nation of
> no-we-canters.
>
> Even with innovation and scaling up, we may at some point have to
> deploy “direct-air capture” technology, which pulls carbon dioxide
> out of the atmosphere. That would be expensive, but Klaus Lackner, an
> engineering professor at Arizona State University, is confident that
> the cost could be brought down to $30 a ton with volume
> manufacturing.



-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#535501

Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Meeting a Global Carbon Limit Is Cheaper Than Avoiding One
>> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/meeting-a-global-carbon-limit-is-cheaper-than-avoiding-one/
> 
> 
>> Can we do it? Climate scientist James E. Hansen has made a compelling
>> case that we could pull 100 billion tons of carbon from the air by
>> massive reforestation?limiting land use enough to allow forests to
>> grow back to their extent before human deforestation. That, along
>> with reducing carbon emissions by several percent a year, which is
>> challenging but doable, could meet the 2? C stabilization target.
>>
>> History is replete with preemptive declarations of infeasibility that
>> proved misguided. As Joe Romm of the Center for American Progress
>> said in response to climate critics, ?Thank goodness these pundits
>> weren't around when we had to do something really difficult, like
>> suffer millions of casualties and remake our entire economy almost
>> overnight to win World War II.? An inspired agreement at the COP21
>> climate summit in Paris this month could kick-start an ambitious but
>> entirely feasible effort.
>>
>> The key factor is that there are technological innovations and
>> economies of scale that emerge only in the course of actually doing
>> something. The price of solar cells globally, for example, has
>> dropped by more than 50 percent over the past several years as China
>> has ramped up production. Those who say ?no we can't? are engaging in
>> self-fulfilling prophecy. The U.S. has never been a nation of
>> no-we-canters.
>>
>> Even with innovation and scaling up, we may at some point have to
>> deploy ?direct-air capture? technology, which pulls carbon dioxide
>> out of the atmosphere. That would be expensive, but Klaus Lackner, an
>> engineering professor at Arizona State University, is confident that
>> the cost could be brought down to $30 a ton with volume
>> manufacturing.
 
 
The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

What a pile of steaming, hysterical shit. 

-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535568

On 11/25/2015 3:32 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Meeting a Global Carbon Limit Is Cheaper Than Avoiding One


WRONG. carbon limits are wild ass guesses.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web