2026-02-10 16:15 UTC
Replies (5)
-
@benlockwood@ecoevo.social 2026-02-10 16:19
@btschumy@mas.to you’re ignoring the knowledge half of the equation, where already know what levels of development are sustainable. So yes we have what we need already
-
@australopithecus@mastodon.social 2026-02-10 17:11
@btschumy@mas.to @benlockwood@ecoevo.social We absolutely do have the technology for those things already, it would just be "more expensive" in the sense that the long-term costs of fossil fuels are all externalized. There are certainly a few things we don't have the technology for yet, but mostly in synthetic chemistry, and the amount of fossil fuels used for that is a tiny fraction of global consumption. The hardest problem would be weaning off of industrial agriculture.
-
@gwentlarry@mastodon.social 2026-02-10 17:14
@btschumy@mas.to @benlockwood@ecoevo.social The technology for metal processing exists. Sweden has demonstrated fossil fuel free steel production, from processing the ore to iron and then on to steel. A commercial plant is under construction. https://www.hybritdevelopment.se/en/hybrit-six-years-of-research-paves-the-way-for-fossil-free-iron-and-steel-production-on-an-industrial-scale/ Most other metals can similarly be produced with effectively zero CO2 emissions. I would agree that cement is a bigger problem but the science is progressing. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352710224004297
-
@johnzajac@dice.camp 2026-02-11 05:15
@btschumy@mas.to @benlockwood@ecoevo.social Ah, but we *do* have the technology to recycle cement. So there you have it. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/05/240522130434.htm
-
@xWood4000@spacey.space 2026-02-21 20:03
@btschumy@mas.to @benlockwood@ecoevo.social I don't know exactly how large machinery you're talking about but there are electric excavators. And really large machinery anyway uses electric motors with diesel generators, which can be replaced with batteries.