Comment on Entropy? Never heard of it.
Scipitie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 days ago
That small red bulb counteracts the entropy argument because you bring energy (and quite a lot of I recall) into the system.
Would be a sad day if we no longer could reduce entropy locally under the invest of energy.
The wider issue is you have to generate that energy, and you have to be able to capture more of carbon than that generation released.
As I understand it doesn’t at all. This is why it’s seen as analagous to a perpetual motion machine, it’s an endless chain of power plants capturing each others carbon to no end.
You could use solar if course, but then why generate anything with fossil fuels just to capture the carbon with solar? Just use solar.
Because we still need to bring CO2 levels down even if we stop burning fossil fuel.
And then we’ll probably need to burn fossil fuel to keep them at the right level, since we are in a capitalistic society and we’re never going to be able to shutdown the CO2 collectors if they are ever built.
What I mean by entropy is that we burn fossil fuels (low entropy) and release CO2 into the atmosphere (high entropy), so it takes a lot more energy and effort to remove CO2 than simply not burning fossil fuels.
Clearly laws of physics work against us when we try to remove a relatively low concentration gas from a planet-wide system.
Next time you write a scientific publication, /s, make sure to have it reviewed by at least 2 Nobel Prize ! 😋
(thanks for the explanation … it was not clear at all)
gnutrino@programming.dev 6 days ago
I don’t think there’d be anyone left alive to be sad in that case…
neatobuilds@lemmy.today 6 days ago
That’s sad