24 sats \ 3 replies \ @xz 8 Feb \ on: EU Doubles Down On Climate Psyop econ
I wondered if anyone here can comment on the feasibility of carbon capture, geological storage, or reuse, converted or not converted.
I don't think I see the feasibility. Maybe there's something I'm missing?
Geological storage is burying the carbon under the ground (after transporting it) into mass graves for carbon. Like collective landfill sites for carbon. Is that seriously accurate, or is someone trolling me?
Conversion is reusing carbon emissions to be used in ... anything. Because everything contains carbon. Have I got that right? Or is there some kind of idea that it could be captured and sent into the ground again to push out oil or deposits of other minerals that are difficult to extract.
Just checking I've got this straight because there's little mention of whether the EU would actually make any serious dent in global emissions, which seems a little pointless, if there's little evidence of other nations stepping down on carbon emissions.
net Zero is clearly a political lever to push through a certain political agenda. in my opinion, the main point is that the Europeans, who have no collateral energy, want to keep the other relevant competitors at the table. that's why they are forcing their net Zero model on the world.
just to add to that
reply
I see. Seen from that viewpoint. I understand why this is emanating from the E.U. There only seems to be external interest when there is political or economic motivation for a certain amount of integration, manifesting in support for Green (like EV industry, solar industry or most obviously, being at loggerheads with energy abundant nations.)