The IPCC has always reserved a place for carbon capture within its broader recommendations. It's not either/or in this case. We need to do both to whatever extent we can. Direct carbon capture isn't really an option thus far, but capture like this at the point of emission has potential to help.
One thing that happens when you see the rest of the world as NPCs is that you stop understanding that they will respond to the things you do in ways that are inconvenient and do not advance your personal agenda.
More than the entire population of Newfoundland and Labrador. And that's not even the attacks people are most worried about.
Fuck all these guys.
War in Iran could cause massive food shortfalls. AI IPOs could cause massive economic disruption. Climate indicators show an accelerating warming.
Can we please hit the fucking brakes for 10 goddamn second?
END THIS STUPID WAR.
REGULATE AI.
IMPEACH THE ENTIRE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.
EPSTEIN. LET'S PROSECUTE SOME CHILD MOLESTERS.
CLEAN AIR, CLEAN WATER, CLEAN FOOD FOR ALL.
Bonus: You have more gas right in the cargo.
This is sounding a bit like Dimension 20 On A Bus. You should join forces!
Israel is continuing to aim missiles and bombs at rescue teams and paramedics in Lebanon.
And no one is uttering a word about it, Min @anitaoakvilleeast.bsky.social
Silence can be interpreted as approval, sir PM @mark-carney.bsky.social . Yes, it’s tricky - but so is turning a blind eye.
TIL chess has escalated in violence, a LOT.
We were promised electoral reform, including an end to first past the post, by the Trudeau Liberals in 2015. They quickly reneged after being elected. Now we have the Carney Liberals trying to get an unearned majority via floor crossers. This is seriously undemocratic.
The richest Americans saw their net worth soar 120% from 2017 to 2025.
The top 1% now control $55.8 trillion in assets — more than the G.D.P. of the United States and China combined.
Meanwhile, millions of Americans live paycheck to paycheck.
Still wondering if inequality is out of control?
I get Conservatives crossing the floor right now. I do not get NDP members doing the same. I know politics can be very different from place to place, but that's a pretty large swing in policy position, and one cannot plead ignorance at this point.
Terrible photo edit of Lee Burton's head superimposed over a poster with the text "Get a leg up with Lee"
Am I doing this correctly?
One of the fun things about #writing is the way sometimes ideas start to chain together in unexpected ways. Had a couple of those today, feel pretty good about it.
#macc #outlining
More like Your New York Times/Washington Post/CBS News Are Destroying Society
So this was linked in a tech group I'm in today, and...yeah. I'm not doing this kind of thing in my day job, and I think maybe that's real bad for my future.
air.dev
Also, just a world-class shot. With no sweepers!!!!
Agreed. And I'd really like it if all the petrostates (Canada in particular included) would stop trying to externalize the burning of the fossil fuels they're selling. Curtailing supply has knock-on effects that will push decarbonization further faster.
Screenshot from the My 2050 website showing an 88% reduction in emissions when maximum efforts are applied to light and heavy vehicles, efficiency, heating systems, industrial carbon intensity, and wind power.
Meanwhile, going hard on efficiency, transportation, and renewables gets you to this picture:
Image from the My 2050 website showing a 52% reduction in carbon emissions if wind is deployed in the UK at the maximum level.
Image from the My 2050 website showing a 52% reduction in carbon emissions if wind AND nuclear are deployed in the UK at the maximum level.
Zero difference between Maximum Wind and Maximum Wind + Maximum Nuclear.
Not according to the tool you linked to me, it doesn't. I don't know what your deal is, but if you're not even being honest about the material you're citing, we can be done with this conversation.
And yes, I agree that maximum effort is required. Elizabeth May of the Green Party of Canada has long advocated for dealing with climate change on a "war footing", which is much the same thing as Anderson's suggestion. But the problem is that the politics keeps getting in the way.
Cumulative emissions around the world, yes. Because a bunch of low-emissions economies are rapidly industrializing. If you want to get Really British about it, the simplest solution there is to Stop Them Industrializing. Is that part of your "plan that adds up"?
This tool says nuclear makes no difference if you go balls-to-the wall on efficiency and renewables. I'm not sure what you thought it would show, but...yeah. Pretty much what's already been said to you multiple times, including in the OP?
Even wind is 3-4x cheaper than 2008 solar at this point. And these prices keep dropping.
Also relevant to that timeline: Since 2000, solar panel prices have dropped by NINETY percent. Installed costs haven't shrunk quite that much, but even residential systems (which are, to be clear, far more expensive per watt than large-scale installations) have halved in cost over that time.
History is written by the winner, so in retrospect, so is ethics?
Sure. And then in his large-scale example, he stepped it down to 10%. Because he's writing 20 years ago, before solar began scaling at its current incredible pace.
I mean...China's emissions fell last year. The US, Canada, and the EU all have significant declines in per-capita emissions. Coal is a non-starter for new energy projects in pretty much every developed economy.
You can say that's no replacement, but it clearly is.
By the by, not that we need to keep banging on the solar drum, but the book you linked imagines a world of 10% efficient solar, whereas even roll-to-roll cells are achieving 15%+ these days, and multilayer systems appear to be well on the way to 40%.
