Flat Preloader Icon

Become a member

Get the best offers and updates relating to Liberty Case News.

― Advertisement ―

spot_img

The Costly Trap: Carbon Capture More Expensive Than Renewables

A new study published in Environmental Science & Technology suggests that transitioning entirely to wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower by 2050 would significantly cut...

Air Pollution

HomeThe Costly Trap: Carbon Capture More Expensive Than Renewables

The Costly Trap: Carbon Capture More Expensive Than Renewables

A new study published in Environmental Science & Technology suggests that transitioning entirely to wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower by 2050 would significantly cut energy costs, reduce air pollution, and slow climate change—all at a fraction of the cost of carbon capture technologies.

Researchers found that investing in carbon capture and storage (CCS) instead of renewables increases overall CO₂ levels, energy demands, and total social costs. According to lead author Mark Jacobson, a professor at Stanford University, every $1 spent on carbon capture rather than clean energy results in higher emissions and costs.

“It’s always an opportunity cost,” Jacobson explains. “Using clean energy for direct air capture rather than replacing fossil fuels only sustains the reliance on fossil fuels, increasing demand for renewables inefficiently—similar to the energy-intensive impact of AI or Bitcoin mining.”

Even if carbon removal technologies were powered by zero-emission energy, they would still be less effective than simply replacing fossil fuels with renewables. The study reinforces that renewable energy adoption remains the most cost-effective and impactful path to decarbonization, making it a clear priority over costly carbon capture solutions. Read Here

News Credit: Tech Explore

Picture Credit: Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain

Previous article
error: Content is protected !!