Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The U.S. Will Need to Spend $100 Billon a Year on Carbon Removal


OverSword

Recommended Posts

Quote

 

The U.S. government needs to spend roughly $100 billion annually on carbon dioxide removal by 2050 to help the world avoid extreme climate change, according to an analysis released Wednesday.

That's 20 times more than what lawmakers committed to in landmark climate bills that aimed to jump-start the development of carbon removal technologies and companies, the Rhodium Group estimated. For context, the sum is also about as much as the entire budget of the Department of Agriculture.

The new analysis comes amid a fierce battle for control of Congress, the White House and the future of U.S. climate policy. The Republican Party is rallying behind former President Donald Trump, whose campaign has promised that if reelected he would "oppose all of the radical left's Green New Deal policies."

But Rhodium's calculations could also bolster progressive critics of carbon dioxide removal who view government subsidies for the costly technology as a distraction in the fight against rising temperatures. Carbon removal companies use a variety of natural and engineered approaches to boost the carbon absorbing capacity of the planet.

 

Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
16 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Ain't gonna happen is it?

From the article

Quote

 

"The bottom line is that right now, for every ton of CO2 removed by a [direct air capture carbon capture and storage] system, we effectively raise ambient CO2 levels by 10 to 20 tons since that’s how much emissions we could have reduced if we had not misallocated the renewable energy along with all of the money and effort needed for DACCS," wrote Romm, who is now a senior research fellow at the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Science, Sustainability and the Media.

 

So let's hope not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just don't "vastly" raise taxes,the water is getting to high as it is for many.

Maybe less multi million dollar private jets for our representatives,and maybe less carbon emitting luxury trips around the world on taxpayers dollars...

Be a hell of a good start!

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is reminiscent of Clive Cussler's Arctic Drift.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

This is reminiscent of Clive Cussler's Arctic Drift.

How?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

How?

Rhodium was the macguffin that was going to solve global warming.  It was a catalyst to extract carbon from the atmosphere.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, OverSword said:

The Republican Party is rallying behind former President Donald Trump, whose campaign has promised that if reelected he would "oppose all of the radical left's Green New Deal policies."

Oh.

That's not good.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.