this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2026
34 points (97.2% liked)

Technology

87627 readers
4009 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nodiratime@lemmy.world -3 points 2 months ago (17 children)

The 2,500 tons of Co2 are roughly equivalent to the tailpipe emissions of 550 avg. australian cars.

So, a wet fart.

[–] Return_of_Chippy@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (7 children)

This is/has been a test facility, not a large scale million-s tons a year thing. Because that's not yet possible, this is a step in a good direction. It's a tremendous advancement that can hopefully continue to be scaled up.

[–] nodiratime@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (6 children)

It's a technofix for a problem that should be adressed way earlier in the pipeline, as is basically all carbon capture in general. These efforts divert energy and attention from solutions that actually matter.

DAC is also a nice deus ex drop in for climate scientists to make the findings more palable for corruct heads of states, padding a non existing carbon budget or even making it possible to return to semi stable ghg concentrations "theoretically possible".

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 1 points 2 months ago

It’s a technofix for a problem that should be adressed way earlier in the pipeline, as is basically all carbon capture in general. These efforts divert energy and attention from solutions that actually matter.

Maybe, but it is better to try to fix a problem that exist than doing nothing hoping to fix the cause.

What would you suggest as "solutions that actually matter" ?

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)