• MxM111@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      You seriously need to ask? You do not want to actually understand how it may work, how much it may cost, how realistic it is? And instead you would use “energy companies = bad” and if they also want to participate in carbon capture, then it is ALL you need to know and reject the idea simply based on this. You do not see this as binary??

      • thisfro@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Companies = bad

        Or a bit more nuanced: Under a capitalist system, the first order of business is to make money. That does not have to be bad a priori, but with the given scenario of carbon capture, the meme points out the fact, that it is mostly greenwashing. Does that mean carbon capture is bad? No. Is it the best way to tackle climate change? Absolutely not. Does it make them money and delay actual action to combat the climate crisis? Yes.

        But that wouldn’t be a meme, would it?

        • MxM111@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Making a meme does not mean that you have to do it as a one-bit stupidity. That’s not a valid excuse.

          There is no single technology that will tackle climate change, it will/does require combined approach and carbon capture quite possible have a role there to play too. And as for companies making money, they do make monies on solar, wind, electrical cars, and they will make money on carbon capture, hopefully. If there is no money to be made, then it would be a very good indication that the idea is dead on arrival.