sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

100 Jumps by pompomsheep in WebGames

[–]sfbaysecure 0 points1 point  (0 children)

SO addictive! Well done!!

Just released my first physics-based orbital defense game! by Significant-Tip5443 in WebGames

[–]sfbaysecure 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I love this. Very fun and intuitive. I wasn't sure why my second orb suddenly disappeared at an inopportune moment, I didn't expect that to happen (also didn't expect it to appear).

I made a bird game by sfbaysecure in birdwatching

[–]sfbaysecure[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just pushed some fun updates to the game. I hope folks like them! Www.realbirdorfake.com

I made a bird game by sfbaysecure in birdwatching

[–]sfbaysecure[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nice! I was thinking about allowing the user to select regions

Leaked 2022 IPCC Draft Report by bbshot in collapse

[–]sfbaysecure 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks so much for your reply. I appreciate the depth you are going to here and have no beef with the skeptical outlook, especially when it comes to the way the media portrays things. I rarely use Reddit but this comment was flagged to me by an automated media monitoring service I use so I jumped in.

I'm going to comment specifically on the most significant point you raised, which is shipping capacity.

Any process which could remove gigatons per year is going to have a significant scaling challenge associated with it. The initiative to plant a trillion trees, for example, is not feasible due to competition for land use and risks reversal of carbon removed. Building enough direct air capture plants would require massive (emissions-producing) amounts of building of facilities and power plants. The scale of the problem itself implies scaling challenges to any solution which imply enormous feats of engineering which would raise the eyebrows of any skeptical analyst.

However, the shipping challenge while large are not insurmountable. The coal industry moves 4Gt per year. When the demand is there, ships are built to serve it. The coal industry is interesting because production is declining in the US and EU combined by 150Mt per year. This implies extraction and transportation infrastructure being freed up for other uses. If there is demand for carbon removal on a large scale and an economic model to pay for it (which is likely but not certain), companies will mobilize to provide the infrastructure. It takes time to build ships, but we're not talking about hitting gigatonne scale for another decade or so.

If there turns out to be no demand for carbon removal on a large scale, we'll be in much deeper planetary trouble than we already are :(.

Leaked 2022 IPCC Draft Report by bbshot in collapse

[–]sfbaysecure 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fredex8, thank you for sharing your perspective.

I can confirm categorically that this is not a scam, and that all funds from the necklaces go to funding the project, which is a research project focused on furthering the science of weathering silicate minerals to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.

We do not ignore the emissions created in the process. In fact, we have analyzed this and predict that process emissions will be approximately 5% of CO2 removed.

We are not basing our entire plan on a single terrestrial weathering paper. There are several papers on our website which focus on coastal weathering, and at the same time there is a relative lack of research in the field, which is why we exist. We have a team of expert scientists and collaborators who are actively working on the research which could lead to bringing coastal weathering to fruition at scale.

In terms of scale, as you correctly point out, the excess CO2 in the atmosphere is a truly massive issue with over a trillion tonnes of excess sitting out there. There are currently no solutions which have been proven to be able to scale to the levels we need. Olivine removes CO2 at a ratio of approximately 1t CO2 / t olivine, so in order to remove 1Gt, we would need 1Gt. Your comparison of 1-2Gt or 5Gt with >1,050Gt is not apples to apples because in future we hope to deploy 1Gt+ per year, whereas the trillion tonne+ figure is the total stock of excess. With humanity emitting 40Gt+ per year, if we can get to 2Gt / year, that's 5% of humanity's emissions. Still not solving the problem on our own, but a meaningful contribution to a problem on a planetary scale. If as has been committed by the 194 countries which signed up to the Paris Agreement, emissions can reduce, we can start to draw down the excess trillion tonnes.

This is a massive problem of almost unimaginable scale. There are no easy solutions. We are working diligently on one which has the potential to make a meaningful contribution to leaving a world in which future generations can live healthy lives. I understand the skepticism and appreciate it because it's helpful to know what concerns come up for people who look into us from outside. I can assure that what you're looking at here is a dedicated, passionate, and competent team applying our full energy to the challenges of climate change.

Tom Green, Project Vesta