Chat

I'll do the opposite and make this long and bitter.

There is hope, look at restorative agriculture which sequesteres CO2 into the ground. It's a bit more work than modern farming but the tradeoffs may outweigh the effort and it's starting to get more popular.

I don't have much faith in carbon capture technologies that are not placed at the concentrated outputs of emitting sources, but i want to be wrong. The worst part about them is oil companies will say 'see, nothing to worry about'.

I think that RNG is going to be a huge factor.
First: because commercially it has a way to make money so anti environmentalists may bite off on it. B: gas stove snobs can keep their damn gas which should reduce political resistance.
III: even though you're burning methane, at the end of the cycle you've pulled CO2 out of the air, created fuel, and have carbonaceous remains that can be put in the ground as fertilizer, overall carbon negative.
4 - As long as there are humans that eat food then there will be farms that grow crops, most crops have parts that we don't eat like stalks and leaves n such, those remains can get dumped into an RNG reactor instead of decomposing into the atmosphere as methane, so even more reduction in GGs because methane is a greenhouse gas.

I really think RNG can have a huge effect as long as the reactors aren't fueled by biomass that is made by chopping down trees and milling them up. I need to find out how much biomass farm waste has...

SMR nuclear is happening, if you ignore the big oil funded green peace clowns you'll see that nuclear is an essential base load source that is reliable and safe.

Electrification is happening, more makers are making electric vehicles, more municipalities are electrifying mass transportation, even shipping is making slow progress. Heatpumps are getting viable even in cold climates.

The grids can take it. There's multiple parts to this story but 4 main parts and the gist is that the growth in demand is not giant leaps but in small steps for now. It is likely that some of these technologies will take on S curve uptake but even then there is plenty of room for growth. If you want i can talk your ear off about this one (I'm an electrical engineer at an electric utility).

You can make a difference, join the citizens climate lobby, they are working on legislation to tax carbon production which shoul help slow the bleeding. This will be hard to pass in the US, but squeaky wheel and all that. Help them get loud. Force politicians to either say out loud that they are against it or are for it and vote out the clowns.

There's also the idea of spraying reflective chemicals in the upper atmosphere to reduce the amount of heat that gets in. I hope we don't do this unless we have to because it just kicks the can down the road and corpos will say 'see, we can stop worrying now'. BUT, it absolutely can buy us more time to save ourselves, and we have the technology to do this right now.

It may seem hopeless with all of the headlines of crossing the point of no return and spiraling out of control and what not. The 'point of no return' is pretty vague and each headline is talking about a different problem. Most of them are talking about the 1.5 or 2 degree temp rise. Some even talk about run away effects like thawing permafrost and undersea stuff that gets released. While that is all fucking terrible I implore you to look at the absolute worst case of run away effect. It's bad, but it's not Venus 2.0 bad and we can buy more time if we have to.

Last, i want to talk about defeatism. It's not too late to stop the absolute worst. Yes, there is permanent damage and we are losing species and people are fucking dieing BUT it's not fucking over. Republicans want you to feel defeated, they want you to think there's nothing you can do and there is no point in trying and at the same time say climate change isn't real. Don't be a part of the republican message. We absolutely can make a difference, we have to make a difference, and we fucking will make a difference.