JAKE TAPPER (HOST): A draft agreement at COP28 calls for scaling up carbon capture and removal. That’s a technique that removes carbon pollution from the air and then stores it or reuses it. Now, critics argue this is expensive, it's unproven, and it’s a distraction from policies to address fossil fuels. Still, do you think carbon capture is better than nothing?
MILES O’BRIEN (SCIENCE CORRESPONDENT, PBS NEWSHOUR): Carbon capture has a place, Jake, in tough ones like the production of concrete or steel. But if you're using carbon capture simply as an excuse to continue drilling, poking holes in the ground to pull oil up and burn it in natural gas plants or continue operating coal plants, you're missing the point. We have a green energy revolution, which is working. We have cheaper, better ways to produce electricity and to spend all of this money to [unintelligible] -- well, it smacks of the fossil fuel industry once again continuing their outright lies.
TAPPER: Yeah. Fossil fuel industry employees and representatives nearly quadrupled registrations at this year's COP28 summit compared to last year. Does that make it more difficult to enact meaningful change, or are they partners in this?
O’BRIEN: It does because we're talking about all of this greenwashing. You've got a climate conference that has 100,000 people there and huge numbers of fossil fuel representatives. Just the carbon footprint alone of the event is staggering. But the influence that this industry has, well, it's hard to overstate it, I think.