Yes, and we’re trying a bunch of things there, too. Let’s push to reduce CO2 generation from the processes that generate them, sequester the CO2 released from those processes and prevent them from entering the broader environment, and find ways to fix atmospheric or ocean carbon in ways that reverse the processes that have already happened in the past.
Yes, it’s often cheaper to just prevent the release of CO2 in the first place. But in certain places and at certain times, there may be cheap ways to fix CO2, so that’s worth doing in addition to attempts to reduce carbon emissions.
that would be great if it didn’t get used as a way to keep emitting pollution, unfortunately in the current political climate any sort of carbon capture or carbon credits are just a smokescreen.
AFAIK the best we can manage to usefully do is encourage using wood in construction, which sequesters something approaching a noticable amount of carbon and is fairly difficult to greenwash. But it’s still basically pointless compared to just getting people to drive less…
I agree that there are issues with the accounting behind people who want to use these as carbon credits, but that’s true of planting trees, too. And nobody says that planting trees is bad or that it gets used as an excuse to keep emitting.
The point is that it’s worth doing, and that any fraud around the accounting behind getting credit for it is separate from the validity of the task itself.
Yes, and we’re trying a bunch of things there, too. Let’s push to reduce CO2 generation from the processes that generate them, sequester the CO2 released from those processes and prevent them from entering the broader environment, and find ways to fix atmospheric or ocean carbon in ways that reverse the processes that have already happened in the past.
Yes, it’s often cheaper to just prevent the release of CO2 in the first place. But in certain places and at certain times, there may be cheap ways to fix CO2, so that’s worth doing in addition to attempts to reduce carbon emissions.
that would be great if it didn’t get used as a way to keep emitting pollution, unfortunately in the current political climate any sort of carbon capture or carbon credits are just a smokescreen.
AFAIK the best we can manage to usefully do is encourage using wood in construction, which sequesters something approaching a noticable amount of carbon and is fairly difficult to greenwash. But it’s still basically pointless compared to just getting people to drive less…
I agree that there are issues with the accounting behind people who want to use these as carbon credits, but that’s true of planting trees, too. And nobody says that planting trees is bad or that it gets used as an excuse to keep emitting.
The point is that it’s worth doing, and that any fraud around the accounting behind getting credit for it is separate from the validity of the task itself.