Filing this away for my next “Democrats are just as bad as Republicans” debate.

The carbon tax is supposed to (partially) go towards credits for EVs

All the IPCC models assume massive amounts of sequestration, I believe

It’s a necessity at this point, even if all fossil fuel use stops globally tomorrow

If the overall goal is to increase the human population, it actually makes total sense

If the goal is to prevent murders, then no, it doesn’t make sense

There’s plenty of EVs with 300+ miles of range now. Shouldn’t be an issue.

carbon sequestration is not ever going to work

I don’t know what you’re talking about, it’s a thing that is currently being done. Not some future hypothetical tech.

But yes it is too expensive for now. Costs are coming down hopefully that continues to be the case.

And yes, the best, cheapest, most efficient way to reduce ghg is to eliminate fossil fuels.

Instead of offsets, companies should be pursuing direct carbon sequestration like with https://climeworks.com/

No estimates, no accounting magic. Just a direct measure of physical, measurable tons of carbon directly removed from the atmosphere.

To me the funniest part of all this is tech workers screaming that the sky is falling. Really shows what a bubble tech is.

Surveillance state.

For California at least, residential use is about 10% of all water usage iirc. So if data centers are dwarfed by that…not a big concern in the big picture.

The issue I guess is when data center usage sucks up all the local supply. State and region wide they don’t use much but they do use a lot in one small area.