96

archive.today • U.S. to Fund a $1.2 Billion Effort to Vacuum Greenhouse Gases From the Sky - The New York Times

I didn't read the article but I did scan it and I saw this...

Oil and gas companies lobbied for the direct air capture money to be included in the law, arguing that the world could continue to burn fossil fuels if it had a way to clean up their planet-warming pollution.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Rom@hexbear.net 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The Energy Department projects that together the two plants will create 4,800 jobs and remove more than two million metric tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere each year, the equivalent of taking half a million gasoline-powered cars off the road.

I looked it up and about 50 billion tons of CO~2~ are released each year. They're patting themselves on their backs for their plan to reduce CO~2~ emissions by a whole 0.04%. Climate change has been solved, everyone!

[-] wrecker_vs_dracula@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago

Ha that’s actually a lot higher than I’d have guessed. The Times’s centering of personal vehicles in their explanation both exaggerates the direct impact of this project, and perpetuates the narrative of climate change being a crisis of people’s personal habits.

[-] Rom@hexbear.net 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And they're 100% going to use this as an excuse to not scale back the burning of fossil fuels in the slightest. Because they'll try literally anything else before going after capital.

Edit: wait nvm, they already directly said that lmao

Oil and gas companies lobbied for the direct air capture money to be included in the law, arguing that the world could continue to burn fossil fuels if it had a way to clean up their planet-warming pollution.

dammit where's our guillotine emojis when you need them

[-] wrecker_vs_dracula@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago

I think on the Internet we call that “mask off”. Notice that they use the term “fossil fuels” instead of “carbon fuels”. They have no vision of participating in an energy revolution that replaces fossil fuels. I could swear there was a trans flag guillotine emoji.

[-] PandaBearGreen@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

That's a bingo.

[-] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 5 points 1 year ago

Less fucking cars would cut down emissions so much more, but car treats go vroom vroom. grillman

this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
96 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13491 readers
928 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank

Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here

Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS