CO2 out of main

[brian45011]

FTFY.

That's just silly. Energy is what matters, not carbon.

 

[Carl Raymond]

Energy is what matters, not carbon.

Why do you say that? Energy that pollutes, from fossil fuels, drives up the Keeling Curve, eating away at our remaining carbon budget. Not sustainable.

Energy that is emissions free - from solar panels made using solar energy, has no effect on the Keeling Curve. It’s greenhouse neutral. Sustainable.

It’s the carbon combustion that has to be avoided.

 

[Artful Dodger]

That's just silly. Energy is what matters, not carbon.

You're ignoring of well-established science. CO2 remains resident in the atmosphere for 1,000s of years after it's emitted by combustion. During those millenia, vastly more heat is trapped via the greenhouse effect than was tapped for useful work when that carbon was burned. Perhaps the least energy efficient mechanism ever devised.

No, it's the carbon cycle that matters. The world economy is out of balance by at least 50% on the emissions side right now, possibly even 90% in the long term. Burning fossil fuels simple dumps carbon into the atmosphere with longlasting, compounding, deleterious effects, none of which are priced into the cost of those emissions (ask the President of Bahamas).

FFs are not an 'energy' source; they are a long-term chemical storage mechanism for solar energy, one which we tap today for our temporary convenience at our long-term peril. Burning FFs a faustian bargain, acceptable only to short-term thinkers.

The science is clear and is not new. The fundamentals were well known over 60 years ago when Frank Capra released his film "The Unchained Goddess" in 1958:

This is a chemistry problem with a business solution but only when we price carbon to allow the free Market to reallocate resources. That's how we get the energy we need in the future, end the burning of coal, oil, and gas all while rebalancing the carbon cycle.

The bonus is that our Sun provides 1,000x more energy to the Earth than we curently obtain from burning fossil fuels. 100 years from now, people will talk about how clinging to FFs was holding us back from a better future.

Telsa is at the forefront of this clean energy revolution, and as investors we are all part of that movement. That's not silly; it's existential.

Let's roll.

 

[Fact Checking]

You're ignoring of well-established science. CO2 remains resident in the atmosphere for 1,000s of years after it's emitted by combustion. During those millenia, vastly more heat is trapped via the greenhouse effect than was tapped for useful work when that carbon was burned. Perhaps the least energy efficient mechanism ever devised.

Note that it's actually even worse than that:

• CO₂'s normal half-life in the atmosphere is 20-200 years according to the IPCC, but that's only due to the primary CO₂ absorption mechanism of it being dissolved by ocean water.
• But ocean water is a limited resource in itself: there's a hard ceiling to ocean acidification (which tipping point we might already be getting close to) which will have catastrophic consequences to marine life and much of the rest of the planet. (Some of the damage from warmer, more acidic oceans is already ongoing: Australia's Great Barrier Reef is probably an irreversible 100% loss at this point already.)
  
• The actual half life of the other mechanisms is measured in hundreds of thousands of years: chemical weathering and rock formation.

This is why atmospheric CO₂ is so dangerous even at low concentrations: methane might be a more potent greenhouse gas but its half-life is only 12 years (i.e. once we get fracking related methane emissions under control there's only about a decade of overhang) - but about 30% of the CO₂ has a half-life of hundreds of thousands of years, the other 70% gets absorbed via ocean acidification (a catastrophic mechanism) with a half life of over ~100 years.

 

[MC3OZ]

Note that it's actually even worse than that:

• CO₂'s normal half-life in the atmosphere is 20-200 years according to the IPCC, but that's only due to the primary CO₂ absorption mechanism of it being dissolved by ocean water.
• But ocean water is a limited resource in itself: there's a hard ceiling to ocean acidification (which tipping point we might already be getting close to) which will have catastrophic consequences to marine life and much of the rest of the planet.
  
• The actual half life of the other mechanisms is measured in hundreds of thousands of years: chemical weathering and rock formation.

This is why atmospheric CO₂ is so dangerous even at low concentrations: methane might be a more potent greenhouse gas but its half-life is only 12 years (i.e. once we get fracking related methane emissions under control there's only about a decade of overhang) - but about 30% of the CO₂ has a half-life of hundreds of thousands of years, the other 70% gets absorbed via ocean acidification (a catastrophic mechanism) with a half life of over ~100 years.

I have no doubt that we will need to actively intervene and suck CO2 out of the environment.

Perhaps with:-
* Fast growing GM modified trees.
* Algae
* Machines.

All of these options are expensive, but eventually we will have no choice...

First we need to stop adding to the problem...

 

[Artful Dodger]

This is why atmospheric CO₂ is so dangerous even at low concentrations <snip> but about 30% of the CO₂ has a half-life of hundreds of thousands of years, the other 70% gets absorbed via ocean acidification (a catastrophic mechanism) with a half life of over ~100 years.

Indeed, the IPCC report cites Shine et al. (2005c) with a revised AGWP for CO2: "The assumed lifetime of 1,000 years is a lower limit."

Compare duelling worse cases scenarios? The Arctic permafrost contains 4x more carbon (mostly frozen as methane clathrates) than humanity has identified to date. If we allow the Arctic to thaw, atmospheric CO2 will go from 410 ppm today to over 4,000 ppm in 200 years time. Sea level rise at that time? 200 feet or 60 meters. Coastal cities?

So therefore, Tesla. As much and as soon and wide-ranging as possible. Then more Tesla. Those fossils fools who won't switch to renewables need to be driven out of business as soon as possible. Future generations will call it mercy.

Some climate catastrophies are inevitable now. We are in fact fighting for the type of future of our decendants will either endure or enjoy over the next few thousand years.

And its deadly serious.

 

[InDaClub]

Here we go again... The end of the oil age can't come soon enough...

This could dampen the markets today, although reading the article it does't sound particularly serious.

Explosion sets ablaze Iranian oil tanker off the coast of Saudi Arabia, Iranian state media says

An explosion damaged an Iranian oil tanker traveling through the Red Sea near Saudi Arabia on Friday, Iranian media reported. There was no immediate word from Saudi Arabia on the reported blast.

State television said the explosion damaged two storerooms aboard the unnamed oil tanker and caused an oil leak into the Red Sea. It did not elaborate.

Another reason to hasten the end of the oil age. The environmental impact of oil leaking from neglected wells in Venezuela is frightening and looks like the apocalypse...

Fishermen live in stain of Venezuela's broken oil industry

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Why don't we just have posters discuss CO2 in the Energy forum to begin with?

Seems to me like the vast majority of posters would like the "main thread" decentralized and that was the mods plan a while back. Has the plan changed?

 

[Ulmo]

Why do you say that? Energy that pollutes, from fossil fuels, drives up the Keeling Curve, eating away at our remaining carbon budget. Not sustainable.

Energy that is emissions free - from solar panels made using solar energy, has no effect on the Keeling Curve. It’s greenhouse neutral. Sustainable.

It’s the carbon combustion that has to be avoided.

Point to the carbon in nuclear power.

Ok, thanks.