Floods, Fires, and Heat Domes (the climate change thread)

They must buy crazy amounts of carbon offsets because their personalities emit nothing but hot air.


I’m sure that I heard Turkey Carlson support the green new deal?


incredulous what are you doing GIF



1 Like

I’m not sure that this is evolving - meaning DNA changes- so much as epigenetic changes? Wouldn’t evolutionary changes take a little longer?

Animals are 'shape shifting' in response to climate change - CNN


No suggestion of epigenetic changes in the article.

Remember mutation is a very sudden change, selection takes time, but lifespans of birds are pretty short.


Can’t wait for the firefighters cheesecake calendar.




I laugh


Prime Minister Sanna Marin (SDP) has given the Centre Party and the Greens until Thursday morning to find common ground in a row that has brought budget negotiations to a standstill, Finland’s largest circulation daily Helsingin Sanomat reports.

The Greens had been eager to continue Wednesday’s climate measure negotiations into the night, however the Centre Party was not as keen, according to Minister of the Environment and Climate Krista Mikkonen (Green), Iltalehti writes.

“Yes, the discussions took place in a good spirit and in a civilised way, but no consensus was found,” Mikkonen, who has been acting as the Greens’ chief negotiator, told the tabloid on Wednesday evening.

The Finnish government’s goal is for the country to be carbon neutral by 2035 and in order to ensure this, annual greenhouse gas emissions need to be reduced by 11 megatonnes. The row over how to implement this, however, is yet to be resolved and ministers are now racing against the clock for a common consensus to be reached.

Some pics from yesterday with more after the limks:



parkour goats GIF


Operators say the Orca plant can suck 4,000 tonnes of CO2 out of the air every year

So, let’s go with the low figure of $10m to build, guess at $2m/yr to operate, give it 30 years to run. Let’s use 8 years as the life of a car (ballpark). This facility sequesters, if (big if?) it works as advertised, carbon “that equates to the emissions from about 870 cars”. Looks like they used the U.S. EPA figure of 4.6 tons/year for emissions per car per year.

Very much back of the envelope that’s around $12000 per car over its lifetime.

I’m almost certainly off by ±50%, but I’d bet a :beer: that the figure is low. IMHE most good engineering ideas do work “back of the envelope”, most bad ones don’t.

If we put a $12k “carbon capture levy” on each car it would make EV’s more competetive. :thinking:

1 Like

Seed tons of more oysters. Long term carbon sinks or tasty meals?

Why not both!


Shell fish, sure, but that’s really just harnessing biological processes to (eventually) make limestone for us.

Dropping the organic step and going directly with the chemistry is an idea that has been around for a while. Here’s a paper doing an estimate for using sodium hydroxide to capture CO₂ and make sodium bicarbonate and water (PDF here). It’s coming in at ~$150/ton using $0.11/kWh power (adjusting for 1.57 inflation since the 1997 date of the paper). Using 4.6 tons/yr per car emitted and an 8 year life span, this direct approach would sequester a car’s 8-year lifetime of carbon emissions for around $5500.

Still a hefty surcharge on a vehicle, but cheaper, as far as I can tell, than the Icelandic project. The paper says the direct method would be competitive with the best case for sequestration and it would be the sort of thing you could use to absorb unwanted power from wind turbines, which comes in at $0.08 USD in Ontario :canada: last I looked.

Edit: So using the video above, 36 billion tons to capture at $150/ton is $5.4 trillion… or about 6% of global GDP.

… and I’m not an :oyster: fan…
Edit: as food… I can see they would be great neighbours if you’re in need of a breakwater… :slightly_smiling_face:

Oysters are cheaper, effective and tastier.


Oysters are cheaper, effective and tastier.

You can even grow them in Newark, I hear… :slightly_smiling_face: I didn’t see a cost analysis in the oyster paper and, don’t get me wrong, I’m all for natural carbon sink processes; it’s not clear to me that the scale is available.

I think that the brute force method has the advantage of laying bare the economics. It might be a high estimate, it might be low, but it’s probably order of magnitude correct and is therefore something you can charge up-front to offset the otherwise externalized cost.


They measured 24.4g of CaCO₃ per shell or about 3g of carbon per clam.

36 billion tons of carbon require removal… annually. I make that about 12,000,000,000,000,000 (12 quadrillion? someone check that for me…) oysters… about 1.7m per person per year… so 6 per minute 12 hours a day…

Someone’s going to have to really, really like eating oysters… :thinking: