Reddit Posts
Mentions
If you believe in carbon capture companies, then you believe in carbon credits. I invested in carbon credits around 2020 when it was hyped up and people noticed the effect of less pollution and carbon use. You can easily see price history and history of companies that partake. However, the proposition is this: Me and the neighbors agreed we'll be net zero for clean energy use. I'll generate 100% of my energy with solar, and he'll burn logs he cut down from the neighborhood forest in his chimney. We agreed that he'll only burn 1 tree per 1000 KWH of solar, so he'll just pay me 10 cents per KWH. We are successful net zero. The 10 cents is the carbon credit, and it's a number set by whoever, supposedly based on supply/demand. If the world actually went renewables tomorrow, there would be no need for credits. Mostly they are government subsidies that corps (i.e. M$) use to avoid more taxes or qualify as net zero (total BS), to claim as environmentally friendly. It's no different than equal opportunity, DEI, buzzwords. At the end of the day, some startups are not successful businesses, great ideas aren't great moneymakers, and your money is your own responsibility to do what you want with.
Power supply is probably simpler. Just a few solar panels provide the power and no need for batteries. Getting the panels up on the other hand is expensive. 100 W/kg = at 240kw = 2.4 tons so $4million. Ground based solar: 240kw / 1 watt \* 6 (4 hours a day generation) \* $1 ($1 /watt) = 1.4 million US 240KW \* 24 hours / 1 KWH \* $1000 = 5.76 million So $6 million for ground based solar vs $4 million for launching solar into space