3 ms·
I'm by no means an expert in the subject, but what you say sounds suspiciously similar to a perpetual motion machine.
by Fargren 11y ago
I'm by no means an expert in the subject, but what you say sounds suspiciously similar to a perpetual motion machine.
- davesque 11y agoThere's no perpetual motion here. It costs energy to create hydrocarbons. The investors backing this project are interested in combating climate change as well as developing energy storage that is carbon neutral (consumes as much CO2 as it releases into the atmosphere).
- ac29 11y agoNot if the process is powered by carbonless energy sources like Solar, Wind, or Nuclear.
- acdha 11y agoSeconding what ac29 said – this obviously only makes sense if you have a power source which doesn't generate new carbon. Solar in particular could make a ton of sense if you had a viable process which could happen out in relatively cheap desert spaces, but I have no idea whether that could work with the water requirements that the article described.