Supreme Court says EPA does not have authority to set climate standards for power plants

[Juryvicious]

So.. when is the uprising? And no, I'm not kidding.

EPA should ignore whatever the illegitimate court says. Also, can Biden do anything to challenge this? Or any other form of government?

 

[Falchion]

The court is on one this week......

 

[killerrin]

OK but like, how significant are these advances and how partial are we talking here? I feel like if carbon capture tech was good enough to compete with moving to clean energy we wouldn't need to be pushing for clean energy in the first place. And then there's the questions of cost, timelines for getting all it set up, etc. It feels a little like "clean coal".

Click to shrink...

That's because it absolutely is a clean Coal situation. What carbon capture advocates don't tell you is it costs more money and energy to research, Implement, maintain and store the captured carbon from the carbon capture tech than it is to just switch to greener ways to begin with. And if at any point someone stops paying the energy bill, all that captured carbon will just find itself magically put back into the atmosphere.

So is it any wonder why energy companies are so heavily pushing carbon capture? It's a fucking infinite payday for them. To say nothing of the additional space requirements to store the shit to begin with.

But it doesn't even matter, Because this is all SciFi to begin with since the tech is nowhere close to being able to capture what we need it to capture, on the scale we need it, at an affordable price to justify it.

 

[Milky Way]

OK but like, how significant are these advances and how partial are we talking here? I feel like if carbon capture tech was good enough to compete with moving to clean energy we wouldn't need to be pushing for clean energy in the first place. And then there's the questions of cost, timelines for getting all it set up, etc. It feels a little like "clean coal".

Click to shrink...

Lol. Carbon capture is not going to work. They're building one that will be the biggest in the world and only captures seconds of co2 emissions per year. Completely useless.

 

[Milky Way]

That's because it absolutely is a clean Coal situation. What carbon capture advocates don't tell you is it costs more money and energy to research, Implement, maintain and store the captured carbon from the carbon capture tech than it is to just switch to greener ways to begin with. And if at any point someone stops paying the energy bill, all that captured carbon will just find itself magically put back into the atmosphere.

So is it any wonder why energy companies are so heavily pushing carbon capture? It's a fucking infinite payday for them. To say nothing of the additional space requirements to store the shit to begin with.

But it doesn't even matter, Because this is all SciFi to begin with since the tech is nowhere close to being able to capture what we need it to capture, on the scale we need it, at an affordable price to justify it.

Click to shrink...

Great answer

 

[deimosmasque]

That's because it absolutely is a clean Coal situation. What carbon capture advocates don't tell you is it costs more money and energy to research, Implement, maintain and store the captured carbon from the carbon capture tech than it is to just switch to greener ways to begin with. And if at any point someone stops paying the energy bill, all that captured carbon will just find itself magically put back into the atmosphere.

So is it any wonder why energy companies are so heavily pushing carbon capture? It's a fucking infinite payday for them. To say nothing of the additional space requirements to store the shit to begin with.

But it doesn't even matter, Because this is all SciFi to begin with since the tech is nowhere close to being able to capture what we need it to capture, on the scale we need it, at an affordable price to justify it.

Click to shrink...

Exactly. It's why we don't have ceramic car engines or fusion power reactors.

The tech exists, but it's so expensive that it's not "profitable" to use on anything more than an experimental scale.

 

[Sayuz]

While I'm sure that's true regarding Nixon's intentions behind the EPA, he did also sign the preceding National Environmental Policy Act into law. I don't think a modern Republican president would ever sign such an act into law, let alone agree to establish the EPA. It's just striking to see how much their party, and perhaps the Republican base as well, has moved to extreme, regressive positions in the last 50 years.

Click to shrink...

According to the book "Being Nixon", Nixon was interested in genuine environmental policies...to an extent. He was concerned with balancing out those with business interests, as he didn't like the idea of environmental laws hurting jobs or economic growth. But the same time, he also told his people in the EPA to not worry about what the businesses thought, because if the businesses had their way they'd "never get anything done."

Of course, this ruling just proves that Republicans aren't interested putting the environment ahead of business ever. Heck, even balancing the two is far too much to ask. If anything, they'd rather destroy the environment just to spite liberals, even when it's not in the interest of business. Talk about insanity.

 

[SquirrelSr]

Lol. Carbon capture is not going to work. They're building one that will be the biggest in the world and only captures seconds of co2 emissions per year. Completely useless.

Click to shrink...

At that point, those guys might as well plant trees. They also contribute more to the environment than some expensive air filter.

 

[jett]

The US is going to shit and is going to take down the rest of us with their bullshit too.

 

[Fiction]

So the EPA, which was set up to protect the environment, can no longer protect the environment?

 

[Ninferno]

We are so fucked...