A friend directed me to a website that reports good news. We all need that during these stressful times.
Here are ten good news stories about the environment.
For example, there is this story.
“Researchers Pull Carbon Out of the Sky and ConvertIt to Instant Jet Fuel, Reshaping Aviation for Good.”
The story begins:
A simple, yet world-altering method of sucking CO2 from the air into airplanes where it is converted directly to jet fuel is described in a new paper published in Nature.
With the importance of removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere at the front and center of so many economic and policy decisions, the invention of an onboard system for carbon-neutral flight would represent a massive step towards addressing the climate crisis.
Some estimates puts the aviation industry’s primarily-CO2 footprint of global emissions at just under 1 billion metric tons, or around 2.4% of all human activities.
Converting atmospheric CO2 into useable hydrocarbon fuel is difficult, and as until recently, expensive both in terms of capital and electricity. Using a molecule that is fully oxidized and thermodynamically stable, there are few keys that can cheaply or efficiently ‘unlock it’ for reuse.
Some catalysts, compounds that can attract and force a change in molecules, can convert CO2 into hydrocarbon molecules of a desirable configuration for jet fuels, but their use is limited because they are expensive or require huge amounts of electricity. They’re also inconsistent with producing hydrocarbon chains with the number of atoms ideal for aviation fuels.
The University of Oxford’s Peter Edwards, Tiancun Xiao, Benzhen Yao, and colleagues designed a new iron-based catalyst that represents an inexpensive way of directly capturing atmospheric CO2 and converting it into a jet fuel-range of hydrocarbons.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I hate to be the downer,but usually if something sounds too good to be true, that’s because it is.
I’m not even saying the process doesn’t work.
But the real question is “will it work at scale to produce a significant amount of fuel to make a real difference?”
The problem shared by all tecnofixes is they don’t really address the central problem: our burning of astronomical amounts of fossil fuels.
And some of them actually make the problem worse because even though they don’t significantly reduce the net CO2 going into the atmosphere, they give the public the idea that they do and that effectively “the problem is solved. We can burn as much fossil fuel as we want and take as many plane trips as we want.”
Not true.
On the other hand, there is something to be said for proof-of-priniciple. I agree with you in theory, but even as pessimistic as I am, I do have a glimmer of optimism for this kind of research. I recently cleared out hundreds of pounds of paper and came across advocacy work I in which I helped in the effort to double the NIH budget from 1998-2003. This was accomplished, and unfortunately was not augmented until recently, and a convincing case can be made that we are now beginning to reap the rewards from the research that was funded in the wake of that doubling. And it also funded much of the research that has been translated into Covid vaccines. Again, not disagreeing, but in this case, I can see a glimmer of light forcing its way through the doorway.
Addressing the actual problem requires making fundamental changes in the way we produce and use energy, which will also mean lifestyle changes, particularly for profligate Americans.
There is really no way around that and the sooner people recognize it, the better.
No argument there.
I also hate to be a downer, but I agree. The problem is corporate greed, and the solution is not a little nicety here and a little nicety there. I wouldn’t be surprised if Bill Hates paid someone to spray perfume on the pile of dung, as they do with corporate education “reform”.
Education Week, which pretends to be the Newspaper of Record for U.S. education but is actually mostly a shill rag for Education Deformation, just ran an article about how administrators can combat “Assessment Skepticism,” as though lack of belief in the validity of state standardized tests were equivalent to Climate Denialism.
Has a Gates-y smell to it, that sort of “journalism,” doesn’t it?
Given the improbability that the world’s population will dramatically change its major habits of procreation and consumption, I think we are constrained to technological solutions to problems brought about by over-population and over consumption. Ultimately, however, I feel we will have to confront a different problem. The rise in standard of living in the world is fueled by unsustainable habits. Rob one of these habits to try to help things, and a political leader will use the matter to make political hay.
Freedom and democracy on a grand scale has never existed without an expanding economy. Sooner or later, we will reach the outer limits of economic possibility. What then?
Not all technological solutions are created equal.
Technologies that move the economy toward non carbon based energy production are fundamentally different from technologies that simply reduce the current amount of CO2 increase rather than eliminating it entirely.
But I agree that introduction of new technologies (some actually not so new, like solar and wind) is going to have to be accompanied by lifestyle changes , particularly in the HS where we use far more energy than we “need” to.
The beauty of technologies like solar and wind is that they work very well on a local scale and can hence be easily adapted by people living in less developed countries that lack existing infrastructure (eg,for electrical distribution).
So solar and wind are actually two technologies that do mitigate the population increase problem.
The other thing is that development itself — if done correctly on a local scale — can finally have a downward pressure on population growth. When people are moved out of dire poverty.
The question I meant to raise was about political systems as they relate to economy and the technology that produces it. I cannot speak with any authority about what technological solutions are possible, only that technology has provided the change over the past century and a half that developed parallel to the growth of democracy. Are the two necessary for each other?
“Freedom and democracy on a grand scale has never existed without an expanding economy.” –and virgin resources and indigenous people to fuel that expansion.
Why make when you can extirpate? One of the unwritten rules.
The ever expanding economy is fueled by Dark Energy.
Just like the Universe as a whole
Every politician blames the current or previous administration for “stifling growth.” The assumption is always that “growth” is good.
Should I be telling myself this about my waistline?
I don’t know if brilliant scientists can work fast enough to counter balance all the recklessness and waste we humans create. Every little bit of change we make helps, but it has to be a global commitment in order significantly change our fossil fuel footprint.
It’s actually not a matter of scientists working fast enough to produce brand new technologies.
We already possess the technologies to move to a non carbon based economy.
What is lacking is not scientific inventiveness but political will.
I’d rate this story as impossible–a chemical equivalent to perpetual motion. Thermodynamics says that the energy necessary to convert carbon dioxide to a hydrocarbon is bound to be as great or greater than the energy released by burning that hydrocarbon. Possibly it could be done on the ground, using energy from an external source, but there’s no way an airplane in flight could do it. Either the source of the information is spreading bad science, or the article writer misunderstood the source.
The process itself might work and need not violate the laws of thermodynamics.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-20214-z
The process they are talking about is basically Fe–Mn–K catalyst mediated hydrogenation of CO2 to produce hydrocarbons (including jet fuel).
One has to go first produce the hydrogen, of course, but that can be done with a non fossil fuel energy source — eg, electrolysis of water using electricity from solar cells.
But as I said above even if the basic process works, it has to be scalable to produce significant amounts of fuel and it has to be efficient enough not to make the whole project prohibitive from an energy and cost standpoint.
But the production of the hydrogen would be done on the ground, not in flight.
They are essentially talking about producing jet fuel from CO2 and H2 to offset the CO2 that is produced when the jet fuel is subsequently burned.
Doing everything in the air as the jet is flying is pure fantasy, but that’s not what the researchers we’re proposing.
My pandemic news: Mary and I got tickets for Stephen Sondheim’s Broadway show “Company.” It’s the first time we have seen a Broadway show since Dec 2019.
What a pleasure! No one could enter the theater without showing their double vaccinated card. Everyone wore a mask inside the theatre.
The house was sold out.
Full orchestra.
The audience was ecstatic.
The performers were energized.
The staging was great.
Everyone was thrilled to see a live performance again.
“Everyone wore a mask.”
“Full orchestra.”
Just curious, but how do you play a wind instrument with a mask on?
But seriously, I wish you well with that. COVID cases continue to spike at the rate of hundreds of thousands per day. Everyone in my office is at least double vaxxed, most boosted – out of about 20 of us we’ve had three confirmed cases in the past month and another half dozen obvious cases that won’t admit it/get tested because they don’t want to quarantine.
But, hey, the Biden administration assures us that Omicron is mild, so you’ll probably only feel like crap for a week or two. Unless you have comorbidities.
The orchestra performed on a platform elevated above the stage. The musicians were not masked. Nor were the actors on stage. Everyone in the audience was required to prove they were fully vaccinated before entering the theater. All of the ushers wore masks. During the play, ushers occasionally walked the aisles to make sure everyone remained masked. During the enthusiastic applause at the show’s end, the lead actors were unmasked but most of the cast wore masks. No one can go to a Broadway play, a good restaurant, a museum, or most places of public accommodation without proof of vaccine.
What do you call a group of masked wind instruments that plays at football halftime games?
A masking band.
Fear won’t alter our Climate Change behavior but wisdom will. Wisdom not transmitted from a mountain top but rooted clearly in the real world we inhabit. The Pandemic is demanding that we learn how to flex different muscles in behalf of our common good and Climate Change will do the same. This documentary received a lot of thumbs down but it also contains truth we should not leave unexamined if we are to survive and flourish.
An outstanding documentary. But not what people want to hear.
I saw it but was annoyed that many of the “facts” were anything but:
https://theconversation.com/3-times-michael-moores-film-planet-of-the-humans-gets-the-facts-wrong-and-3-times-it-gets-them-right-137890
Hooray for Vicarious Broadway attendance by sheltering-at-home readers. It was almost like being there and it was a relief to be reminded that We Can Do This. Thank You.
I see no good news in finding new ways to meet our unexamined and insatiable “needs”. As someone said decades ago, when the mantra was “Do More with Less!” : “Shouldn’t that be “Do Less with Less?”
I am not sure where to post this…this happened today in Utah…but it’s NOT good news. They have been wrestling with “test to stay” in the schools…but now, abandoning that and saying even if students test positive for Covid, they are to go to class anyway. This is the Davis County School District, which is already in trouble with the DOJ for racial discrimination. WHAT ARE THEY THINKING??? (I hope you can see the pic of the letter sent out by the District through this google link https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NsbUVHKery4u99rGDWu81MYh0T09qCLv/view?usp=sharing )
!!!!
Insanity
As Albert Einstein liked to say, Insanity is doing what Utah does and expecting a good outcome.
Sorry, SomeDAM. That’s a quotation from Abraham Lincoln’s VLOG.
You mean his VLOG cabin?
Haaaa!
I think it close to inevitable that the now Fascist Repugnican Party will seize complete control of the U.S. government in 2025. My basis for hope is that these fools–McCarthy and Greene and Gaetz and DeSantis and Abbott, and so on–like IQ45, have NO CLUE how far behind the populace they are, even if that populace is indifferent enough not to get out to the polls and so to allow them to assume power.
RESTING my hope on the UNREST that occurs after the fascists seize power here.
Let’s face it: Folks in the mid-twentieth-century weren’t as well educated and weren’t as smart as they are now. IQ tests (yes, I know of the fallibilities of these, but we don’t have much else) have to be renormed every once in a while because the average IQ has been rising about 1 percentage point over decade for a more than a hundred years now. This is known as the Flynn Effect. Perhaps it was easier, then, to put young people in jaunty uniforms and line them up to goosestep and HH. Possible? In other words:
What if they gave a Fourth Reich and nobody came?
one percentage point every decade
“to put young people in jaunty uniforms and line them up to goosestep and HH”
That’s known as the General Flynn Effect
The General Flynn Effect: one propagandist point every week
Ukraine’s government websites were brought down by a cyber attack yesterday. The Foreign Ministry site was replaced by a splash page reading, “Be afraid and expect the worst,” according to a report from CBS News.
At least it wasn’t a tweet that said “Stop the steal. I’ll join you in the fight to take back the Capitol”
“We will march to the Capitol. I’ll be with you,” said Great Orange Leader to his assembled insurrectionists.
May the Fascist be with you!”
Donald Trump, The Empire Strikes Back
“Use the Fascist, Qanon”
“We will march to the Capitol. I’ll be with you,” said Great Orange Leader to his assembled insurrectionists.
The guy is breathtakingly stupid and ignorant, but he has enough low cunning to let others take the fall for him while he slithers away, The Teflon Don 2.0.
The bigger problem is that he was elected by an enormous heard of the breathtakingly stupid and ignorant.
Ooops–an enormous HERD….which no doubt heard from him just what they wanted to hear.
An exaltation of larks. A murder of crows. A herd of wildebeest. A thug of Republicans. A squabble of Leftists. A gullibility of Trump supporters.
A cartel of Republicans?
A congress of baboons, but that’s unfair to baboons.
A group of baboons is called a troop, a flange, or a congress, though the last of these is unfair to baboons.
Bob, Those are great human group names based on the strange names for animal groups! But are there really THREE terms for groups of baboons? And where did these names come from–did some zoologist or English teacher of the past propose a contest?
The term troop is the formal one. The term flange was a humorous one introduced by a TV program called Not the 9:00 News. Some internet sites will tell you that the term congress, used in this way, is incorrect and is just part of an Internet meme, but those are wrong. The term congress can be used for any group of animals and has been used so for a long time. The term itself dates back to the Middle Ages. See Chaucer’s Parliament of Fowls.
A dump of Trumps
An insurrection of Republicans
A murder of McMichaels.