4 ms·

Yeah I skimmed through the linked article[1] very quickly, and the word "hydrogen" appears only twice. It does seem like they're glossing over the cost of hydr

• xyzzyz 8y ago
  The cheap way to obtain hydrogen is to produce it from natural gas, which is of course missing the whole point of CO_2 sequestration.
  • semi-extrinsic 8y ago
    Well, kinda. You can do methane to hydrogen with CO2 capture and storage. But my big question is why would you want to convert it into hydrocarbons for transport then? Direct air capture (DAC) is a maybe-way-out-in-the-2050s technology, but even assuming it were readily and cheaply available in large scale today, doing DAC straight to storage and then just using oil and gas like we've always done would be a much cheaper and more efficient method than going what you propose. Basically: air->CO2->storage AND (CH3)n->burn versus air->CO2[a] AND (CH3)n->CO2[b] + H2[b] AND CO2[a] + H2[b] -> (CH3)n->burn AND CO2[b]->storage (Obviously not taken to be real well-defined balanced chemical reactions).
    • technicalbard 8y ago
      Why anyone would try to capture CO2 from AIR (at 410 ppm) when you could get it from flue gas (from a power plant), where it exists at tens of thousand of ppm (i.e. %) is beyond me. The technology has been commercially demonstrated to capture CO2 and compress it for about $100/tonne.