News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Oh, so it's bullshit.
Oh, so this is going to increase CO2 output by using up even more energy. Yep. Bullshit.
Notice they also don't say what this sustainable fuel is. Because I'm guessing, what with it being literally created from carbon, it's not the fuel we want to be using in the first place.
Near the end of the article it says that methane is one of the products from the microorganisms. Seems kind of counterproductive. Not only would burning methane release CO2, but methane itself is one of the worst greenhouse gases.
You're right, I forgot to even mention the methane!
This is the corresponding author of the study:
That doesn't sound like a bullshitter to me.
You can feel free to check on the legitimacy of the multiple other authors in the peer-reviewed study too:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-51700-3 https://lemmy.world/comment/12934351
Just because they have money from a private partner doesn't mean it's valid or built on actual science. Steven Jones was working catalytic hydrogenation that were formed around a real idea for cold fusion but was beaten to the punch by Pons and Fleischman. In the end, none of what those people had was real science or technology and yet had millions of dollars poured into it from real companies.
Novo Nordisk is a healthcare company and all carbon capture is bullshit. In this case, they're capturing the carbon by using a ton of energy, releasing methane and creating a different carbon-based fuel.
Andrew Wakefield had academic bonafides and and worked for the Wellcome Trust. He was also full of shit.
The fact that the technology works does not mean it's a good idea to use it.
As always. The most efficient way to capture carbon is to never dig it up in the first place.
Carbon capture is an action of desperation and would only possibly make sense if we were already fully transitioned to renewable energy. It's all bullshit unless we're stuffing the carbon back in the ground and even in that case it's unlikely it'll ever make sense.
The Novo Nordisk Foundation is a charity which owns a holding company with a majority stake in Novo Nordisk the pharma company.
Anyway, my whole point was that arguments to authority (these researchers published this, so don't question it) are not valid. You've used them against people challenging research papers for which you agree with the conclusions.
I never said anything about the scientists who did this at all. I never even said this doesn't work as described.
The bullshit part is that this is some sort of way out of global warming and a way to develop sustainable green fuel and I'm not sure why that isn't clear to you.
Thanks for the summary, so your saying this no different from hydrogen as fuel?
This is worse. This is basically taking carbon soot and turning into diesel or something.