• dillekant@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I can sort of imagine the people writing this paper: “No der dude, it’s so obvious”, “yes but is there a study for it?”, “of course let me just look it up real fast”

    “err guys, I know what our paper is going to be about”.

  • lefaucet@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 days ago

    Folks need to wrap their heads around the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Converting carbon to CO2 gives us lots of energy and it will take like… way more energy to reverse that process

    Even with shortcuts like finding lots of Calcium. Gonna take a LOT of calcium which will take a LOT of energy.

  • Greyghoster@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Folks need to wrap their heads around the fact the any attempt to sequester carbon is pointless if we don’t reduce emissions. QED

    There may be a place after emissions are reduced but of limited impact.

  • lefaucet@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Folks need to wrap their heads around the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Converting carbon to CO2 gives us lots of energy and it will take like… way more energy to reverse that process