3 ms·

Those numbers are definitely inflated, even at current stage Direct Air Capture Technology is already at well below 1000 Dollar per metric tonne with an outlook

Those numbers are definitely inflated, even at current stage Direct Air Capture Technology is already at well below 1000 Dollar per metric tonne with an outlook to end up below 100 Dollar per tonne in ~20 years. [0] Not saying that DAC is the ideal approach but I find those numbers you mentioned to be very inplausible. [0] https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/06/cost-plunges-capturing-carbon-dioxide-air https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/06/cost-plunges-capturi...

ForHackernews 8y ago
I think the idea is that the tax would dis-incentivize emissions, so the cost of capture is irrelevant.
- ttul 8y ago
  Capture technology becomes automatically profitable if the cost to capture is less than the tax. If my business pays $100/t to emit carbon vs $90/t to capture it, I’ll emit and capture and make a $10/t profit. At $100/t, capture technology would become widespread very very quickly as an arbitrage against the carbon tax. And yes, some emitters might find a more profitable way via reduction in emissions, but since capture is equivalent to reduction, the most profitable option will win out every time. This is the magic of carbon taxes.
ttul 8y ago
Carbon Engineering already captures CO2 for $100/tonne. They published a paper on it https://www.cell.com/joule/fulltext/S2542-4351(18)30225-3 https://www.cell.com/joule/fulltext/S2542-4351(18)30225-3 http://carbonengineering.com/ http://carbonengineering.com/ “Individual DAC plants can be placed in any country and in multiple climates, and can be built to capture one million tons of CO2 per year. At this large scale, our technology will be able to achieve costs of $100-150 USD per ton of CO₂ captured, purified, and compressed to 150 bar.”
ttul 8y ago
I should add: BC’s carbon tax will reach $50/t by 2021, which is half way to viability for Carbon Engineering.

ForHackernews 8y ago

I think the idea is that the tax would dis-incentivize emissions, so the cost of capture is irrelevant.

ttul 8y ago
Capture technology becomes automatically profitable if the cost to capture is less than the tax. If my business pays $100/t to emit carbon vs $90/t to capture it, I’ll emit and capture and make a $10/t profit. At $100/t, capture technology would become widespread very very quickly as an arbitrage against the carbon tax. And yes, some emitters might find a more profitable way via reduction in emissions, but since capture is equivalent to reduction, the most profitable option will win out every time. This is the magic of carbon taxes.

ttul 8y ago

Carbon Engineering already captures CO2 for $100/tonne. They published a paper on it https://www.cell.com/joule/fulltext/S2542-4351(18)30225-3 https://www.cell.com/joule/fulltext/S2542-4351(18)30225-3 http://carbonengineering.com/ http://carbonengineering.com/ “Individual DAC plants can be placed in any country and in multiple climates, and can be built to capture one million tons of CO2 per year. At this large scale, our technology will be able to achieve costs of $100-150 USD per ton of CO₂ captured, purified, and compressed to 150 bar.”

ttul 8y ago

I should add: BC’s carbon tax will reach $50/t by 2021, which is half way to viability for Carbon Engineering.