Hacker News Reader

> Sure, we also want to be doing stuff that's net carbon negative, but that's a long way into the future.

Isn't refusing emitted carbon (net negative) the entire point? That wouldn't be an "also" then, and newfangled ideas that don't give such a result are nothing to be excited about.

Seems to me capturing from the air is a wholly separate matter, whereas capturing at the source (i.e. power plant) should be the focus.

View on HN

I guess "net negative" can be interpreted different ways. I was thinking of "net negative" to mean "capturing CO2 that's already been emitted", as opposed to "capturing CO2 before it is emitted in the future".

I agree any CCS scheme must be "net negative" in the sense that it doesn't produce more CO2 than it captures. But all the technologies in the pipeline today fulfill this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com