For comparison I was looking back at the "Project Vesta – Mitigating climate change with green sand beaches" thing.
There were estimates of $10-$25 a ton for olivine rock https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20415138
There were estimates of $10-$25 a ton for olivine rock https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20415138
1. Olivine is plentiful, everywhere, including as the tailings from huge defunct coal mines;
2. All of the mining & transportation infrastructure is already in mining country;
3. Mining country is desperate for solid, dependable blue collar work; and,
4. Mining country already has expertise in ... mining.
Instead of rolling in and telling mine workers that "their livelihood is destroying the world, please go find something else to do", the Fed could roll in and say: "now it's your turn to ~save the world~; go dig!"
>> Olivine is plentiful, everywhere,
That means olivine will be mined everywhere. not necessarily in coal country.
Are they?
You'd really have to twist some strange language to attribute distributed global computation to SV because they may own or have invented certain technologies to even begin to argue that.
Just think of how expensive SV is in general. It doesn't make sense.
2. There are hardly any Democrat leaders left who care about or can talk to blue collar workers.
The problem is voters, not workers. US voters are significantly older and to the right of employees - either past or near retirement. Improving employment certainly does work on the margins, but in absolute terms there's a lot of people who don't care and just want to be entertained.
Problem number 3 though is the US doesn't emit that much carbon. To be part of a worldwide solution we need to sell carbon capture tech to China and India.
What makes you say this? All they have to do is grind up olivine and dump it in parts of the ocean with high vorticity like unused shores.
Or if you need a less relevant but scarier message, they emit more radiation than a nuclear plant.