The following submission statement was provided by /u/Reasonably_Bee:

I'm interested in connected cars and this is a fascinating use case of CAN bus data as a conduit for gaining data insights from a vehicle without needing to rely on hardware sensors – these seem to be more vulnerable to the moving car environment than I thought, and prone to failure after a relatively short time.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11x8vp4/compredicts_virtual_sensors_are_changing_the/jd1ybx4/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/1xdevloper:

For the first time, scientists at the University of Sydney and the University of Basel in Switzerland have demonstrated the ability to manipulate and identify small numbers of interacting photons—packets of light energy—with high correlation.

This unprecedented achievement represents an important landmark in the development of quantum technologies. It is published today in Nature Physics.

Stimulated light emission, postulated by Einstein in 1916, is widely observed for large numbers of photons and laid the basis for the invention of the laser. With this research, stimulated emission has now been observed for single photons.

Specifically, the scientists could measure the direct time delay between one photon and a pair of bound photons scattering off a single quantum dot, a type of artificially created atom.

"This opens the door to the manipulation of what we can call 'quantum light'," Dr. Sahand Mahmoodian from the University of Sydney School of Physics and joint lead author of the research said.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11wwr0a/scientists_open_door_to_manipulating_quantum_light/jd04wdp/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/lughnasadh:

Submission Statement

We are used to anything space-based requiring massive engineering efforts and equally massive budgets.

This is interesting as it points to a future where cheap manufacturing could predominate. No doubt, there would still be a need for huge and complex engineering efforts, but if some useful space-based resources could be made this easy, wouldn't they quickly increase in number? Particularly as cheap reusable rockets predominate in the launch sector.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11wodb5/10_months_after_its_launch_by_spacex_a_10000/jcyxzmj/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/filosoful:

Clean energy and technology can be exploited to avoid the growing climate disaster, the report says.

But at a meeting in Switzerland to agree their findings, climate scientists warned a key global temperature goal will likely be missed.

Their report lays out how rapid cuts to fossil fuels can avert the worst effects of climate change.

In response to the findings, UN secretary general Antonio Guterres says that all countries should bring forward their net zero plans by a decade. These targets are supposed to rapidly cut the greenhouse gas emissions that warm our planet's atmosphere.

"There is a rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all," the report states.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11wl83z/un_climate_report_scientists_release_survival/jcyh3rt/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/dustofoblivion123:

From the article:

"The Third International Summit on Human Genome Editing has concluded, and experts have come to a consensus that, “Heritable human genome editing remains unacceptable at this time,” according to their statement. There has ben a lot of hype surrounding the Nobel-prize winning tool CRISPR-Cas9, and it has been revolutionary for the biomedical laboratory. But there appears to still be a significant number of technical challenges that have to be overcome before this approach can be used to edit the genome of human embryos. This is even before we grapple with the ethical implications."

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11wcqu1/experts_conclude_genome_editing_in_human_embryos/jcxdd79/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/Exciting-Phrase-684:

Venom from honey bees were found to have a damaging effect on breast cancer cells, leaving normal cells undamaged.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11vmfed/anticancer_activity_of_bee_venom_components/jcto4ty/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/ethereal3xp:

>Turning gas into plasma creates an intense electrical current for powering potent hypersonic weapons.

>Chinese researchers built a hypersonic generator that could power military lasers, rail guns, and microwave weapons.

>The relative compact nature of the hypersonic generator opens the scope of potential uses.

Chinese scientists say one formidable explosion inside a shock tunnel can turn hot gas into the most powerful hypersonic generator a military has ever seen—strong enough to charge military lasers, rails guns, microwave weapons, and more.

As reported by the South China Morning Post, a new peer-reviewed paper in the Chinese Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics explains how the hypersonic generator turns one detonation inside a shock tunnel into enough electrical current to power hypersonic weapons of the future.

The Chinese scientists were able to use a controlled detonation to turn hot gas into a plasma filled with racing ions, which converted to current. With shock waves accelerating the compressed argon gas to 14 times the speed of sound, the charged ion-filled plasma then passed through magnetohydrodynamics generators to produce electric current up to 212 kilowatts while using.26 gallons of gas. That’s enough power for a burst of energy unlike anything available now in a compact system.

“It has a large capacity and high efficiency," the scientists write, via the SCMP. “There is no need for intermediate energy storage components. The energy can be directly transferred to the load without a high-power switch. And the device can start up quickly.” The generator also has no rotating parts, increasing efficiency and ease of use.

With some of the largest weapons in development requiring a gigawatt of input power, the researchers say they can produce that with 177 cubic feet of hypersonic plasma (that’s smaller than most vans).

China isn’t ready to deploy the new system just yet. There are plenty of logistical hurdles to sort out in how to transport a device that requires controlled detonation, and just how to handle the gas needed for a second charge when on the move. Still, if the next iteration of the science offers up an automated reloading of the technology, China’s hypersonic weapons just got a colossal burst of power.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11v9d7z/china_built_a_hypersonic_generator_that_could/jcs2uj3/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/ethereal3xp:

>Meet China's latest AI news anchor, a young woman who runs virtual Q&A sessions to teach people propaganda

>Ren Xiaorong debuted on Weibo on Sunday and so far only works with preset questions and responses.  Chinese state media outlet People's Daily has unveiled its digital news anchor, who'll be online 24/7.

>The AI-driven chatbot claims to have learned the skills of "thousands of news anchors." It's so far only been able to answer pre-set questions with propaganda-driven responses.

China has unveiled its latest digital news anchor, an "artificial intelligence" entity that claims to provide 24/7 news coverage.

The anchor, a virtual young woman called Ren Xiaorong, introduced herself to Weibo, China's version of Twitter, in a video published on Sunday by state media People's Daily. Sporting a black jacket and shoulder-length hair tucked behind her ears, Ren claims to harness the professional skills of "thousands of news anchors."

"365 days, 24 hours. News broadcasts about any topic all year round," Ren says in a robotic tone. "Ever single bit of feedback you give will help me improve myself," the bot added in the video.

People on Weibo, a platform that's heavily moderated and censored, still gave Ren a warm welcome despite her limited capabilities.

"This figure looks pretty good! Technology is changing with each passing day," wrote one Weibo user. "If it wasn't for the synthetic dubbing, on first glance you wouldn't be able to tell if this was a virtual person. Will news anchors be replaced by AI in the future?" wrote another.

Ren now joins a small crowd of digital AI news anchors in China, the first of which debuted on state agency Xinhua in 2018. So far, however, the virtual anchor is no rival to ChatGPT. Insider saw that Ren's only function, as of Thursday, is providing pre-programmed answers to questions about China's "Two Sessions" political conference.

Users are able to select one of four preset questions related to the conference, to which Ren will give a generic answer in line with the central government's messaging. One can cycle through different sets of questions, but at no point can users type their own messages to Ren.

China is now racing to find its answer to ChatGPT, the AI chat bot that's disrupted industries.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11ugegy/meet_chinas_latest_ai_news_anchor_a_young_woman/jco290n/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/HoldenFinn:

Submission Statement: Artificial general intelligence is a bit of a white whale for AI researchers. While those like Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking have warned about it's potential dangers, there's reason to believe that it could be reigned in and provide a better future for man/machine relationships by training it with the right tools--and, surprisingly, DnD might be one of them.

Beth Singler, a digital anthropologist and AI religions expert (seriously), penned a 2018 article proposing the Elf Ranger Test -- a kind of updated response to the Turing Test that uses the framework of Dungeons & Dragons to test an AI's actual capabilities. With the release of ChatGPT many DnD enthusiasts have turned to it as a tool for DMing and their character creation. So it's worth revisiting Singler's article within the framework of new advancements in generative AI and LLMs.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11txrqx/dungeons_dragons_could_prevent_the_ai/jclbgc2/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:

From the article

>"This mission will debut Firefly's unique two-stage Blue Ghost spacecraft, offering NASA and other customers multiple deployment options as we collectively build the infrastructure for ongoing lunar operations and planetary exploration," Bill Weber, CEO of Firefly Aerospace, said in a different statement(opens in new tab).
>
>The award is the second CLPS contract for Firefly. In 2021, the firm was selected to put 10 payloads on the near side of the moon. That Blue Ghost mission will launch on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket in 2024.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11tu2rj/nasa_selects_firefly_aerospace_for_mission_to/jckpzvt/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:

From the Article

>Rolls-Royce has received funding from the UK Space Agency to develop a nuclear reactor for a Moon base.
>
>The project will look into how nuclear power could be used to support a future base on the Moon for astronauts.
>
>Scientists and engineers at the British company are working on the micro-reactor programme to develop technology that will provide power needed for humans to live and work on Earth's natural satellite.
>
>All space missions depend on a power source to support systems for communications, life-support and science experiments.
>
>Experts suggest nuclear power could potentially dramatically increase the length of lunar missions.
>
>The UK Space Agency has announced £2.9 million of new funding for the project which will deliver an initial demonstration of a UK lunar modular nuclear reactor.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11to9uk/rollsroyce_goahead_to_build_a_nuclear_reactor_on/jcjwljy/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/filosoful:

Landmark report urges overhaul of wasteful water practices around world on eve of crucial UN summit

The world is facing an imminent water crisis, with demand expected to outstrip the supply of fresh water by 40% by the end of this decade, experts have said on the eve of a crucial UN water summit.

Governments must urgently stop subsidising the extraction and overuse of water through misdirected agricultural subsidies, and industries from mining to manufacturing must be made to overhaul their wasteful practices, according to a landmark report on the economics of water.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11tjlos/global_fresh_water_demand_will_outstrip_supply_by/jcjd0ub/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/dogonix:

In the past 2+ decades, we’ve witnessed the media landscape morph before our eyes. It started with the dematerialization of print and other tangible media, then continued with the unbundling of articles from newspapers, songs from albums and videos from cable networks. Yet, just as the industry seemed to have figured it out, AI language models now stand ready to trigger yet another seismic shift.

The spotlight has shifted from search engines to conversational AI systems, prompting us to wonder: Are we on the brink of a ‘No-Web’ reality? A future governed by chat-oriented interfaces that disintegrate the “blue link” and with it, the current ad-based publishing business model we’ve grown to know and (perhaps not) love.

As we watch the scale tip between old-school search and the AI-fueled chat revolution, a set of questions arise: What are the risks and opportunities that lie ahead for publishers? Will they be able to acclimate to this brave new world? Can they find new ways to monetize content as the old regime falls apart? And will this storm extend beyond publishing, affecting other web-based services?

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11snygx/noweb_the_inevitable_future_of_digital_content/jcenrp0/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/izumi3682:

Submission statement from OP. Note: This submission statement "locks in" after about 30 minutes and can no longer be edited. Please refer to my statement they link, which I can continue to edit. I often edit my submission statement, sometimes for the next few days if needs must. There is often required additional grammatical editing and additional added detail.

The opening of this article tells you everything you need to know.

>In 2018, Sundar Pichai, the chief executive of Google — and not one of the tech executives known for overstatement — said, “A.I. is probably the most important thing humanity has ever worked on. I think of it as something more profound than electricity or fire.”

>Try to live, for a few minutes, in the possibility that he’s right. There is no more profound human bias than the expectation that tomorrow will be like today. It is a powerful heuristic tool because it is almost always correct. Tomorrow probably will be like today. Next year probably will be like this year. But cast your gaze 10 or 20 years out. Typically, that has been possible in human history. I don’t think it is now.

>Artificial intelligence is a loose term, and I mean it loosely. I am describing not the soul of intelligence, but the texture of a world populated by ChatGPT-like programs that feel to us as though they were intelligent, and that shape or govern much of our lives. Such systems are, to a large extent, already here. But what’s coming will make them look like toys. What is hardest to appreciate in A.I. is the improvement curve.

>“The broader intellectual world seems to wildly overestimate how long it will take A.I. systems to go from ‘large impact on the world’ to ‘unrecognizably transformed world,’” Paul Christiano, a key member of OpenAI who left to found the Alignment Research Center, wrote last year. “This is more likely to be years than decades, and there’s a real chance that it’s months.”

I constantly re-iterate; The "technological singularity" (TS) is going to occur as early as the year 2027 or as late as the year 2031. But you know what? Even I could be off by as many as 3 years too late. The TS could occur in 2025. But I just don't feel comfortable saying as early as 2025. That is the person of today's world in me, that thinks even as soon as 2027 is sort of pushing it. It's just too incredible for me even. I say 2027 because I tend to rely on what I call the accelerating change "fudge factor" that is how Raymond Kurzweil came to the conclusion in the year 2005 that the TS would occur in the year 2045. He knows now that his prediction was wildly too conservative. He too now acknowledges that the TS is probably going to occur around the year 2029.

I put it like this in a very interesting dialogue with someone who we have argued what and by what timeline was coming for almost the last 7 years I believe. Now he is a believer.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/113f9jm/from_bing_to_sydney_something_is_profoundly/j8ugejf/?context=3

https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11o6g71/microsoft_will_launch_chatgpt_4_with_ai_videos/jbr2k1c/?context=3

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11shevz/this_changes_everything_by_ezra_kleinthe_new_york/jcdrt9v/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/ComfortableIntern218:

SS: I remember seeing something about this technology last year. Making a bold claim is one thing, but actually spending millions to go to space is another. I see they have a launch partner, so they must have something because companies don't just send things up on multi-million dollar launches for fun. If this thing actually works as intended, it could change space exploration. It's about time we get excited about space again. I wonder what they intend to do with this besides just Earth orbit missions?

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11s12p9/ivo_ltd_to_launch_quantum_drive_pure_electric/jcb6zgr/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/yoaviram:

This is a thought experiment exploring current state-of-the-art and future trends in LLMs used by intelligence agencies and their implications on our online privacy. Is this a realistic scenario? Is it not going far enough?

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11r66hm/what_can_a_chatgpt_developed_by_a_wellfunded/jc6qu4t/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:

From the article

>A new paper from the Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) and Harvard University confirms that these UAPs seem to defy physics as they lack certain tell-tale signs, such as an ionized tail or optical fireball produced by friction.

Also from the article

>The research around Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP), which are really just UFOs by another name, is often wrapped up in the feasibility of intelligent life visiting Earth. But in a new draft paper (that has yet to peer reviewed), Sean Kirkpatrick, director of the Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), and Harvard University’s Avi Loeb, stripped away the more philosophical questions about life on other planets and instead focused on the physics of “highly maneuverable” UAPs specifically.
>
>While designing “physical constraints” in order to analyze these UFOs, Kirkpatrick and Loeb determined that the recent UAP observations do defy the laws of physics, stating that “the friction of UAP with the surrounding air or water is expected to generate a bright optical fireball, ionization shell and tail—implying radio signatures.” However, many of the UAPs studied show no signs of these signatures

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11r3xnf/highly_maneuverable_ufos_defy_all_physics_says/jc6f7km/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/lughnasadh:

>>In past industrial revolutions, machinery has also replaced human labor but productivity gains did not all accrue to owners of capital—those gains were shared with labor through better jobs and wages. Today, for every job that is automated all productivity gains go to the owners of capital. In other words, as AI systems narrow the range of work that only humans can do, the productivity gains are accruing only to the owners of the systems, those of us with stocks and other financial instruments. And as we all know well, the development of AI is largely controlled by an oligopoly of tech leaders with inordinate power in dictating its societal impact and our collective future.

What is interesting about this article is how blunt it is in stating current AI use is unethical. Especially considering the source, The Carnegie Council For Ethics in International Affairs. I am especially impressed that the authors do not automatically accept the premise that AI will generate more jobs than it replaces. That question is more often brushed under the carpet and ignored by academic think tanks.

I've asked the authors of this article to do an AMA with r/futurology. If anyone reading this could facilitate that, I'd be grateful if they could DM me here, or message the Mods.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11qe2mx/now_is_the_moment_for_a_systemic_reset_of_ai_and/jc2m7am/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/Charlotte_D_Katakuri:

Recent advances in deep learning and generative AI, such as ChatGPT, are receiving a lot of attention, and are getting better every year. Some programmers are already using ChatGPT to automate parts of their jobs. ChatGPT in its current form can already write simple code for you. Will this mean programmers will be replaced soon?

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11qb0g1/will_ai_replace_programmers/jc25rpa/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/thebelsnickle1991:

Scientists have called for a legally binding treaty to ensure Earth's orbit isn't irreparably harmed by the future expansion of the global space industry.

The number of satellites in orbit is expected to increase from the current 9,000 to more than 60,000 by 2030, with estimates suggesting there are already more than 100 trillion untracked pieces of old satellites circling the planet.

While such technology is used to provide a huge range of social and environmental benefits, there are fears the predicted growth of the industry could make large parts of Earth's orbit unusable, wrote an international collaboration of experts in fields, including satellite technology and ocean plastic pollution, the journal Science.

This demonstrates the urgent need for global consensus on how best to govern Earth's orbit, said researchers, including from the Universities of Plymouth, Arribada Initiative, The University of Texas at Austin, California Institute of Technology, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Spaceport Cornwall and ZSL (Zoological Society of London).

The experts acknowledged that a number of industries and countries are starting to focus on satellite sustainability, but this should be enforced to include any nation with plans to use Earth's orbit.

Any agreement, they added, should include measures to implement producer and user responsibility for satellites and debris, from the time they launch onwards. Commercial costs should also be considered when looking at ways to incentivise accountability.

"Minimising the pollution of the lower Earth orbit will allow continued space exploration, satellite continuity and the growth of life-changing space technology," said co-author Kimberley Miner, scientist at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11oootr/scientists_call_for_global_action_to_clean_up/jbtlge1/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/ethereal3xp:

>Plastic pollution in oceans has reached 'unprecedented' levels in 15 years

Plastic pollution in the world's oceans has reached "unprecedented levels" over the past 15 years, a new study has found, calling for a legally binding international treaty to stop the harmful waste.

Ocean plastic pollution is a persistent problem around the globe -- animals may become entangled in larger pieces of plastic like fishing nets, or ingest microplastics that eventually enter the food chain to be consumed by humans. 

Research published on Wednesday found that there are an estimated 170 trillion pieces of plastic, mainly microplastics, on the surface of the world's oceans today, much of it discarded since 2005. 

"Plastic pollution in the world's oceans during the past 15 years has reached unprecedented levels," said the study, published in open-access journal PLOS One.

Researchers took plastic samples from over 11,000 stations around the world focusing on a 40-year period between 1979 and 2019. 

They found no trends until 1990, then a fluctuation in trends between 1990 and 2005. After that, the samples skyrocket. 

"We see a really rapid increase since 2005 because there is a rapid increase in production and also a limited number of policies that are controlling the release of plastic into the ocean," contributing author Lisa Erdle told AFP. 

The sources of plastic pollution in the ocean are numerous. Fishing gear like nets and buoys often end up in the middle of the ocean, dumped or dropped by accident, while things like clothing, car tyres and single-use plastics often pollute nearer to the coast.

They eventually break down into microplastics, which Erdle said can look like "confetti on the surface of the ocean".

>'Flood of toxic products'

On current trends, plastic use will nearly double from 2019 across G20 countries by 2050, reaching 451 million tonnes each year, according to the report, jointly produced by Economist Impact and The Nippon Foundation. 

In 1950, only two million tonnes of plastic were produced worldwide. 

Recycling, even in countries with advanced waste management systems, has done little to help the pollution problem since just a small percentage of plastics are properly recycled and much often ending up in landfills instead. If landfills are not properly managed, plastic waste can leech into the environment, eventually making its way to oceans. 

"We really we see a lack of recycling, a flood of toxic products and packaging," Erdle said. 

The rates of plastic waste were seen to recede at some points between 1990 and 2005, in part because there were some effective policies in place to control pollution. That includes the 1988 MARPOL treaty, a legally binding agreement among 154 countries to end the discharge of plastics from naval, fishing and shipping fleets. 

But with so much more plastic being produced today, the study's authors said a new, wide-ranging treaty is needed to not only reduce plastic production and use but also better manage its disposal. 

"Environmental recovery of plastic has limited merit, so solution strategies must address those systems that restrict emissions of plastic pollution in the first place," the study said. 

Last year, 175 nations agreed to end plastic pollution under a legally binding United Nations agreement that could be finalised as soon as next year. 

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11oodad/plastic_pollution_in_oceans_has_reached/jbtjhcx/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/berlinparisexpress:

Just interested in everyone's thought on the topic.

I've been thinking about this on the way to work lately and I just don't think anyone hates working per se - they hate selling their time and obeying to arbitrary orders. Giving a hand to move a friend's home is often super fun and rewarding - why? It's shared work on a voluntary basis that feels super useful with a clear goal that is achievable by cooperation.

So yeah, I would definitely still work on a UBI, but I would definitely think about work differently, ands I think this is what universal income is all about. I might work more locally, take more risks or be more involved in causes I truly care about. I don't like feeling useless and I don't think most people would become lazy because they suddenly earn a guaranteed 700$ a month.

What are your thoughts on the matter? What would you do with a guaranteed income every month, no matter your situation?

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11nxvg4/with_a_universal_income_will_we_stop_working/jbpls9x/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/rherbom2k:

It's exciting to think about the possibilities of gene editing, but we have to be careful about how we approach it. We've heard some amazing success stories about CRISPR-based treatments, but we need to make sure that everyone can benefit from these therapies, not just the wealthy few. There are also important ethical and technical concerns that we need to take into account, like unintended effects or the potential for rogue scientists to exploit the technology. It's not all doom and gloom though - we can also find some humor in the situation and bring diverse perspectives into the conversation. As we move forward with gene editing, we need to keep both our heads and our hearts in the game.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11nxok1/more_than_200_people_have_been_treated_with/jbpkk8u/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/chrisdh79:

From the article: This week, Denmark inaugurated the world's first national project to bury CO2 from abroad and bury it deep beneath the ocean.

The Nordic country is administering a so-called CO2 graveyard where it will bury CO2 roughly 5,900 feet (1,800 meters) beneath the North Sea.

The new initiative, called the "Greensand" project, is led by British chemical giant Ineos and German oil company Wintershall Dea. It's part of a wider plan to prevent the release of CO2 into the atmosphere in order to attempt to stave off the worst effects of climate change.

The Greensand project is one of many carbon capture and storage (CSS) projects in the works around the world. It will aim to store up to eight million tonnes of CO2 per year by 2030 to help fight climate change. As EuroNews points out in a report, roughly 30 CSS projects are currently operational or in development throughout Europe.

What sets the Greensand project apart from other similar initiatives is the fact that Denmark is importing CO2 from abroad for its CSS project, making it the first country to do so.

The CO2 is first captured at the source and then liquefied before being transported by ship. However, the project may use pipelines in the future.

The new project "will help us reach our climate goals, and since our subsoil contains a storage potential far larger than our own emissions, we are able to store carbon from other countries as well," explained Climate Minister Lars Aagaard.

Danish authorities, who aim to reach carbon neutrality by around 2045, say the new initiative is "a much-needed tool in our climate toolkit."

It's worth noting that, though the Greensand project could store millions of tonnes of CO2, it will form part of a much larger global effort required to avert the climate crisis.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11nog0x/denmark_will_be_first_country_to_import_store/jbo2h0c/

The following submission statement was provided by /u/Woke_Soul:

In simple terms, instead of extracting something from nothing, the energy was "borrowed" from somewhere else, taking advantage of the idea of quantum entanglement, the fact that two subatomic particles can change their state in line with the other, even when the two are separated by a distance.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11n1wwy/researchers_say_they_managed_to_pull_quantum/jbkxp6x/