Login
You're viewing the sfba.social public feed.
  • Jul 31, 2026, 12:22 PM

    @MarkHoltom

    Research is research. Future units will be more efficient.

    Looking at this and extrapolating to the future is like looking at a model T and assuming you could predict modern car culture. Simply multiplying is both misleading and misses the point.

    The reality is we need to look at and try all potential remediations, and one is not exclusive of others. Direct carbon capture doesn't mean we aren't also looking at conservation and other mechanisms.

    The unfortunate reality is we need to not simply stop dumping carbon into the atmosphere - we need to reverse the flow. Carbon capture and sequestration technologies is that process, and needs to happen *in addition to* conservation.

    I suspect the eventual efficient solution will be something not invented yet. But to get there we need to iterate on what we can achieve. This isn't a solution - it's part of a process.

    💬 2🔄 0⭐ 2

Replies

  • Jul 31, 2026, 12:35 PM

    @tbortels @MarkHoltom Except you are fighting an uphill battle against the fundamental laws of physics.

    It is very hard to imagine this type of technology making a meaningful impact -- especially within the shrinking timeframe we have left.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 2
  • Jul 31, 2026, 4:00 PM

    @tbortels

    I understand what you are saying, but it is not being borne out by the facts (AFAIK).
    The UK govt is investing £25Bn in carbon capture - even when it has been shown not to work at scale. They are being 'guided' by the oil lobby who tell them it will all work out fine.

    So, we are not exploring lots of avenues, we are in a blind alley.

    And your thought that the solution will appear in the future, is like the picture below - 'And then a miracle happens'.

    Image attached toot
    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Jul 31, 2026, 4:09 PM

    @MarkHoltom

    We believed heavier-than-air flight was impossible until engines improved - than it was.

    The reality is we need to both stop making a mess *and clean the mess up*. Neither alone is sufficient.

    People not involved in solving a problem should stand aside for those who are. You are welcome to give up. I choose not to. There is nothing *fundamentally* impossible about carbon sequestration - you've shown that yourself. Your argument is essentially "it won't scale", while I am saying "it doesn't scale - yet".

    In either scenario - we must also stop making the mess as well.

    When I had young children, their rooms were a disaster area. Part of learning to not make a mess was learning that they were *responsible* for cleaning up that mess. You cannot separate conduct and remediation - they are two sides of the same coin. And telling folks a problem *cannot be solved* is a pretty solid way to ensure it won't be.

    If you give people a get out if jail card on cleanup - they'll do it again.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0