That's why we need to head back to the moon. There are some interesting articles about an isotope version of hydrogen known as helium-3 which can be converted to a proper source of energy. However, this isotope is not radioactive and has shown to have all the traits for a good source of nuclear energy. I really think nuclear energy is the future (along with magnetism), but not really fission which a lot of the reactors use the principles behind currently, but fusion is the way to go for the future. The problem though is no nuclear reactor right now can control the vast amount of energy that is initially released during a fusion process. It might be attainable as time goes on, but it's still very much concepts at this point. As for the point of electromagnetic potential, it's the ability to make public transportation have the reliability and speed where using a car is considered useless for a decent sized roadtrip.
Mining on the Moon for Renewable Energy
Mining The Moon - Rare Minerals - Helium 3
Hydro can be pretty destructive to the local environmental, even if it is technically a green energy. It's also not an and/or situation, we shouldn't only go with thermal or solar or wind or nuclear, all should be explored.
However outside of huge advancements in carbon capture or some other breakthrough the damage is already done and at this point it's just trying to minimize the impact.
That's why we need to head back to the moon. There are some interesting articles about an isotope version of hydrogen known as helium-3 which can be converted to a proper source of energy. However, this isotope is not radioactive and has shown to have all the traits for a good source of nuclear energy. I really think nuclear energy is the future (along with magnetism), but not really fission which a lot of the reactors use the principles behind currently, but fusion is the way to go for the future. The problem though is no nuclear reactor right now can control the vast amount of energy that is initially released during a fusion process. It might be attainable as time goes on, but it's still very much concepts at this point. As for the point of electromagnetic potential, it's the ability to make public transportation have the reliability and speed where using a car is considered useless for a decent sized roadtrip.
Mining on the Moon for Renewable Energy
Mining The Moon - Rare Minerals - Helium 3
Carbon capture won’t be efficient or prevalent enough to make a dent in the emissions in the near future.
It causes a ton of political movements as well, like who does the moon belong to if they do decide to start mining it? And if there is money to be made, which there would be, then weapons come into the picture. So besides mining it for a natural resource, it could turn into a war. Now I know this all sounds utterly ridiculous, but honestly 150 years from now it probably won't be.Would love to get humans back to the moon, and He-3 is one good reason among many. But strip mining the moon cannot be a permanent solution. As a stepping stone to gas mining Jupiter/Saturn...that I could see. Though that is decades away from early planning stages IMO.
Is it because of the technology or lack of proliferation? If it's lack of proliferation more money should be invested in the existing technology.
What also never gets talked about is the storage and usage of captured CO2. The most popular use is actually to drill for natural gas and oil by injecting it into ground. The most viable storage idea is to pump it into voids in the ground... which can cause earthquakes (that will release some of the captured CO2), acidify aquifers (making it easier for heavy metals to leech into our water), and typically leaks out at a small rate anyway.
It isn't a viable technology right now and is more about keeping fossil fuels viable than it is limiting CO2.
The strongest uses for carbon capture are sodas/seltzers/beer or anything that needs CO2 injected into it. I think there's good reason Seltzer water is making a comeback and being marketed so hard. We're going to need it if we want to take carbon out of the sky and put it into something else.
Reforestation and gov't stepping up with strict protocols around deforestation is actually a viable strategy for capturing CO2 naturally. It isn't really cost efficient, and there needs to be solutions to provide enough food for populations... but it is a path.
I work for a company that’s currently capturing CO2. I don’t know much about it (they have all kinds of lines of biz) but it seems to be working well and efficiently. I’m surprised they’re not building more but yeah - we gotta solve the problem of where to offload the carbon.
very true points. I’m curious though on the deforestation part. I don’t know if you saw 60 mins on this by chance but there’s a ton of carbon in Siberia locked under the earth that is starting to leak out (the ground is thawing out and releasing the worlds biggest concentration of carbon from underground). The scientist there is working to bring buffalo and maybe even wooly mammoths back via DNA to take out the trees. His hypothesis is that the trees have warmed the land there and is causing the ground to thaw. So he’s bringing back the animals that stampeded and knocked out all the vegetation so the ground temp could cool down and freeze. Interesting stuff.
I work for a company that’s currently capturing CO2. I don’t know much about it (they have all kinds of lines of biz) but it seems to be working well and efficiently. I’m surprised they’re not building more but yeah - we gotta solve the problem of where to offload the carbon.