CNN is notorious for stretching the truth in pursuit of the class interest of their owners.

AFAIK, the oil companies need a large volume of gas that's free from oxygen. I wonder how energy intensive this "carbon capture" tech is compared to capturing the 78% nitrogen that makes up our atmosphere? This implementation of the technology might be worse for the environment than doing nothing.

...I hope this doesn't awaken anything in me...

updog

A lot of the electricity probably came from burning natural gas at the power plant, and then some of that (~5%) gets lost in transmission. If we assume the natural gas plant is 60% efficient at turning gas into electricity, then an electric heating element in a hot water tank at your house would be about 55% efficient.

A typical gas furnace is about 80% efficient at turning gas into hot fluid, and a good one can reach 95% efficiency.

Depending on the fuel mix of your local grid, there's a good chance that burning natural gas at home will result in less pollution than using electric resistance heaters, either for heating water or the air inside your home during winter. Places like Washington state that generate most of their electricity from hydroelectric power plants will be exceptions.

However, heat pumps can be higher than 100% efficiency. They don't use electricity to generate heat, they just move heat from one place to another. You'll produce fewer emissions overall by using an HVAC heat pump to heat your house, and a heat pump water tank for hot water. Even if you live in a place like Canada, you can reduce emissions by installing a dual-fuel system that will use electricity to run the heat pump weather permitting, and fall back to using gas when the outdoor temperature goes too far negative.

Using heat pumps to move heat from outside, to inside your house, to inside your hot water tank is more efficient than using gas to heat your home and water, even when the electricity to run the heat pump is generated by burning natural gas.

OP could have a well.

https://www.npr.org/2023/10/05/1200788439/wind-power-cargo-ships-carbon-emissions

yeah, coulda just been "renouncing rule"

USA already spends more on healthcare than Europe does, they just get worse results and less healthcare per dollar. The US would be able to afford to spend even more on weapons if they got their shit together and de-privitized their healthcare system.

You're not wrong, but that's just growing pains that every technologically capable species goes through. Like every other kind of alien, we have less than 1,000 years to figure out how to move our industry and other energy use and generation off-world before we cook ourselves.

Avocados and logging also don't need to worry about getting shut down by the law like the cocaine and heroin business does.

Legalize the coke and dope, and the incentive to resort to violence to avoid criminal penalties goes away.

It's been twenty-two long hard years without food