The claim that there are forbidden tech paths that could save us, if only greens weren't so technophobic, has never held up to scrutiny.
Negative emissions techs are a prime example of a set of approaches that may/ may not hold promise, but cannot possibly save us by themselves.
Negative emissions techs are a prime example of a set of approaches that may/ may not hold promise, but cannot possibly save us by themselves.
https://twitter.com/AlexSteffen/status/1427322488740978702
Follow @Peters_Glen on this. He knows what he's talking about
https://twitter.com/Peters_Glen/status/1424984859978596358
There are likely *no* plausible futures where lots of negative emissions mean another couple decades of very slow action work out okay in the end.
Ecologically-informed, technologically-astute advocates for climate/sustainability progress understand that predatory delay and civic sabotage by legacy unsustainable industries is—by many factors of ten—more a barrier to innovation than anything oldskool environmentalists think.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
