Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

mackdaddy

(1,963 posts)
4. Article does not start out too well..
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 11:00 AM
Jun 2016

"Carbon dioxide emissions must decrease to nearly zero by 2040 if global warming by the end of this century is to be held to 2 °C."

Maybe if they said end of this DECADE instead of century. We are already over 1.4 degree C, and are still adding CO2. Just what is already in that atmosphere we will be well above 2deg C.


If we do not put the CO2 in the atmosphere in the first place, we would not have to pull it back out. Burning 1 ton of coal puts 2.86 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. (And this does not include the fossil fuels burnt to get the coal out of the ground and to the furnace.)

I have a 10kw solar array I installed exactly 3 years ago, and I have produced 38megawatt hours of electricity in that time. It would have taken 38 thousand pounds of burning coal to produce the same amount of electricity. That is also 54 tons of CO2 NOT produced by my one personal solar array.

Who do is send my $400 to $1000 per ton of CO2 out of the atmosphere to? Heck I would be happy with the $100 per ton.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Go Inside an Industrial P...»Reply #4