3 ms·
Capturing CO2 from air seems like a very difficult task. Its only 0.041% by volume, which means you need huge volumes of air, hence all the fans. One promisin
by thinkcontext 8y ago
Capturing CO2 from air seems like a very difficult task. Its only 0.041% by volume, which means you need huge volumes of air, hence all the fans. One promising technology I've seen involves taking CO2 out of seawater, sequestering it as a mineral and producing H2 as a byproduct, called electrogeochemistry [0]. They claim it can be done relatively cheaply but are still lab scale.
The other negative emissions technologies I've seen are biomass energy plus carbon capture and storage (BECCS). That involves using biomass for some energy purpose, say making ethanol or burning woods chips, and capturing and storing the resulting CO2.
[0] https://news.ucsc.edu/2018/06/electrogeochemistry.html https://news.ucsc.edu/2018/06/electrogeochemistry.html
- m_mueller 8y agoCould someone point out to me how BECCS compares to just using solar/wins plus batteries for energy? Independence from local climate/geography? I assume that the vast majority of people live in areas where alternative energies are viable, the main missing piece in thar puzzle is cheap battery tech. For housing purposes this is already pretty much solved, it‘s called a water tank (for thermal storage).