• Caveman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    That’s nice and all but these are fungi release CO2 into the atmosphere just like burning it would. It’s a bit counter-intuitive but burning it with carbon capture is less CO2 emitting.

    Filtering out particles is obvious requirement and easier than filtering CO2. This is all a worse solution than to simply use less plastic. Taxing plastic out of existence is the real solution.

    • Tyfud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      10 months ago

      Preach.

      Everyone wants a silver bullet to the problem. The silver bullet begins and ends with a corporate pocketbook.

    • Magnetar@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      But the plastic already is captured carbon. Burning it and then capturing it again makes no sense at all.

      If you want to avoid the micro plastic, store it better, that’s still much cheaper.

        • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          ironically nuclear waste is way safer, because we have extremely strict standards for handling it.

          also most nuclear waste is just irradiated tools and clothing

    • xenoclast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Taxing wasteful uses and protecting life saving uses (sanitization, hospitals, etc). Is the only solution. Treat every other approach as distractions by people who want to profit from the way things are.

      Plastic is one of the greatest inventions of all time. But just like nuclear energy, it’s also the most deadly to us if we are stupid.