• zik@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    But still… you’re burning hydrocarbons so you end up producing a lot of CO2 which is going straight into the atmosphere. That’s not what I’d call super green.

    • Viper_NZ@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s carbon that’s already part of the carbon cycle. Like burning wood or consuming food.

      The carbon to worry about is the stuff we’re extracting from underground.

      • Rekliner@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        And where are the bioreactors located? What would happen to that carbon if it weren’t collected by the reactors?

        I agree its better than mined gas, it falls under the 3Rs, but it’s still taking carbon from the ground and releasing it into the atmosphere.

        In the grand scheme of things the deus ex machina of fusion is the only long term solution.

    • SenorBolsa@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The methane just breaks down into an equivalent amount of CO2 when vented anyways and until then is a much more potent greenhouse gas. That’s why it’s usually flared off apart from safety.