this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2025
350 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

63082 readers
3644 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
350
Carbon capture more costly than switching to renewables, researchers find (techxplore.com)
submitted 6 days ago by realitista@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.world
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/5180379

This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.

The original was posted on /r/technology by /u/nimicdoareu on 2025-02-15 16:52:57+00:00.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 33 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I'm confused why this is even a question that needs to be answered.

We need renewables and carbon capture to even have a slight chance of having a barely livable planet.

There's no single solution out there that fixes things

[โ€“] gnome@programming.dev 5 points 6 days ago

True, though, we do need a quicker solution with a lower barrier to adoption ASAP. Carbon capture could be a good long-term approach to augment CO2 management, provided we figure out the details of CO2 solution "loads"/proportions, costs, maintenance, and capture locations.

load more comments (1 replies)