Reposted by Aitor Marcos
New research by @aitormarcos.bsky.social and I suggests that moral hazard may remain a stubborn obstacle to the development and implementation of carbon dioxide removal technologies at scale. IOW, if you believe you can simply remove #CO2, why decarbonize? Link:
authors.elsevier.com/a/1ntP%7E3Q8...
![Among the ideas raised during early discussions was the possibility of building airports in Africa, which would in turn boost the need for oil on the continent. “It costs you X million dollars and you’ve got a guarantee of however many flights, [and] you’re the guy that’s supplying the fuel oil,” the source said. Other ideas generated by the oil sustainability program, though not necessarily by McKinsey, include working with an automaker to produce a cheap car that can be sold in emerging markets to give “an oil uplift for the kingdom” and to fast-track commercial supersonic air travel, explicitly because it consumes three times more jet fuel than normal aircraft, according to presentations obtained from program officials as part of the CCR’s undercover reporting. It’s unclear specifically what ideas McKinsey’s consultants advised on.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:66lbtw2porscqpmair6mir37/bafkreigous5hphoa72f4g22pcjufyaf44f2adayii33bihnoeykoaydrxy)
