4 ms·

Stanford Prof. Sally Benson's talk here is a great overview: https://youtu.be/lIVwbSnD0AI?t=127 https://youtu.be/lIVwbSnD0AI?t=127 Specifically, she talks abou

by pkrein 8y ago

Stanford Prof. Sally Benson's talk here is a great overview: https://youtu.be/lIVwbSnD0AI?t=127 https://youtu.be/lIVwbSnD0AI?t=127 Specifically, she talks about the results of the Sleipner Project in the North Sea, where they've measured leakage rates, etc: https://youtu.be/lIVwbSnD0AI?t=1199 https://youtu.be/lIVwbSnD0AI?t=1199

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
NoblePublius 8y ago
Still seems like this is a big guess that sequestration works over long periods, or at all at the scale necessary to be industrially significant. I’m inherently sceptical of anything hydrogen related due to the fuel’s association with delay tactics from the carbon industry. Chevron would prefer we all not buy electric cars in hopes of HFC becoming a real thing which, obviously, is just a farce to keep paying them to produce, transport, and sell solid fuel. I think we are better off as a society not burning carbon at all, not looking for places to put carbon polution.
- pkrein 8y ago
  Charm co-founder here... We are not betting on hydrogen fuel cell cars. There is an existing $120B/year market for hydrogen used in the production of ammonia fertilizer and oil refining. That hydrogen is currently produced from fossil natural gas, and we are replacing that. The Sleipner Project for geological carbon sequestration has been ongoing for 20 years with extremely rigorous measurement. We also know that natural gas is stored in geological deposits for millions of years, and in vast quantities. I don't see a strong reason to be skeptical of long-term sequestration a slightly different gas in those same geological formations.
  - NoblePublius 8y ago
    Natural gas wasn’t injected down there by man. I can tell you’re sincere but those are not the same things. This still seems like a giant guess. We’re better off burning as little carbon as possible.

by pkrein 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

NoblePublius 8y ago

Still seems like this is a big guess that sequestration works over long periods, or at all at the scale necessary to be industrially significant. I’m inherently sceptical of anything hydrogen related due to the fuel’s association with delay tactics from the carbon industry. Chevron would prefer we all not buy electric cars in hopes of HFC becoming a real thing which, obviously, is just a farce to keep paying them to produce, transport, and sell solid fuel. I think we are better off as a society not burning carbon at all, not looking for places to put carbon polution.

pkrein 8y ago
Charm co-founder here... We are not betting on hydrogen fuel cell cars. There is an existing $120B/year market for hydrogen used in the production of ammonia fertilizer and oil refining. That hydrogen is currently produced from fossil natural gas, and we are replacing that. The Sleipner Project for geological carbon sequestration has been ongoing for 20 years with extremely rigorous measurement. We also know that natural gas is stored in geological deposits for millions of years, and in vast quantities. I don't see a strong reason to be skeptical of long-term sequestration a slightly different gas in those same geological formations.
- NoblePublius 8y ago
  Natural gas wasn’t injected down there by man. I can tell you’re sincere but those are not the same things. This still seems like a giant guess. We’re better off burning as little carbon as possible.