Rachel Freeman- Free Response

 Today while I was at the gym I listened to a TED Talk about a new plant in Iceland that has the ability to suck CO2 out of the atmosphere and turn it into rock to be stored underground. At first, I was amazed that we are finally coming up with technology that has the potential to fix our climate crisis issues, but then I realized that the goal of the plant is to get to net zero, not 0 emissions. While of course reversing climate issues as they have advanced so far is going to require more than just consuming fewer fossil fuels, the machine gives people the misconception that we can continue to use our nonrenewable resources just because it "won't be as harmful" for the planet's atmosphere if we have the kind of CO2 transformative technology all over the world. The machine works by a system of fans, heaters, and filters powered by a local geothermal plant in Iceland that separates CO2 from the air and heats it to be mixed with water, then it is pumped underground where the H2O/CO2 mixture is cooled into stone, frozen in time. Not to mention, Iceland is one of the only places in the world where geothermal energy is abundant and readily available for this kind of extensive power, which means that it will not run as CO2-free in most other places in the world. While it seems like an easy solution that is relatively simple to understand, the machine actually only absorbs a small fraction of the carbon already taken care of by our oceans and forests, and since even those are declining, it will be doing virtually nothing unless there are plants all over the world, running 24/7. Now the question is, how are the plants going to be powered? If not through green energy because that's not even widespread enough to be used in every common household, what kind of emissions will we be creating to power the plant, just for it to suck back in? As much as I want for there to be immediate answers for all of these tough questions and reservations that I'm sure many people around the world have, I'm worried that the path to hell is paved with good intentions, and the plant will, in fact, be counterproductive unless we find a way to ease off our reliability on fossil fuels in all other aspects of our lives. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Nature Walk

 I took a walk around the Noland trail last week to just be able to say I have done it before my time ends at CNU. This was always a bucket list thing to do and after the 6-mile walk, I wish I had done it a lot earlier. I felt at peace during the walk like I didn't have finals coming up or papers to write. The only thing that was going through my head was "Wow it's been an hour already". The walk calmed my nerves and prepared me for my finals week and everything to get crazy. I wish I did this freshman year so I could have made it a habit before my final semester.
Read more

Haley Conroy - 2/14/23 - John Muir - (Outside of Class Reading)

  In the beginning section of John Muir’s essay titled Wild Parks and Reservations , he goes into depressing detail about noticeable changes in landscapes, particularly plant life, in many different regions of the United States. As I read this section I found myself thinking that it seems somewhat similar to something you would see in an essay on the environmental changes induced by climate change today. One connection between the text and modern-day was between ecotourism and the quote "Thousands of tired, nerve-shaken, over-civilized people are beginning to find out that going to the mountains is going home; that wilderness is a necessity, and that mountain parks and reservations are useful not only as fountains of timber and irrigating rivers but as fountains of life." (721). Muir has taken the ideas of simplicity in life suggested by philosophers such as Thoreau and embodied them, although I think that Muir is a well-educated man that understood the complexities that exis...
Read more

Makenna Sowards—Free Response 3, Vegetarianism

 Dr. Kip speaking in class about renouncing vegetarianism because he considered it to boost him onto a moral high ground made me consider my own stance on vegetarianism. I haven't eaten meat in a year and a half, and my reasons for starting on this journey have remained as my reasons to continue. After learning about the detrimental impact of the meat-packing industry, I very quickly realized that was not something that I wanted to perpetuate by spending money on meat products. Though, it can very easily be argued that my small, personal movement against the food conglomerates responsible for releasing grotesque amounts of methane into the atmosphere as well as carbon emissions from large numbers of fossil-fueled machines does not make a very big impact, I think it serves another purpose: awareness. When people ask why I refuse to eat meat, it gives me the opportunity to speak on the carbon footprint of the meat-packing industry and how it is one of the largest contributors to dest...
Read more