Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> We need to eliminate actul emissions. As in, actual exhaust gases coming out of cars and planes and snokestacks, not just mathematically offset "net" emissions. There is no way around that.

How so? What difference is there between emitting zero and emitting x kilograms and sequestering x kilograms?

Extra work. Exactly the problem of having to mine and dump a lot more minerals or plant a lot more trees or whatever if we keep emitting too much.

Market pricing can take care of that though. If the thing that creates carbon emissions is valuable enough that it's cheaper to offset those emissions than stop doing the thing (or find a non-emitting way to do the thing), it makes sense to do the thing and the offsetting.

Again, nobody is saying that emissions need to go to absolute zero, but they do need to be cut. The less "valuable" part of them, if you will.

Oh, I see now that my "eliminate emissions" above could be read as "eliminate all emissions". That's not what I meant, but it's my fault for not putting it clearly (and the typos as well, I was typing only half-awake). Anyway, let's eliminate a lot of emissions, including pretty much all from land vehicles, as soon as possible. And also sequester carbon.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact