3 ms·
I think the problem with that approach is that it would be harder to establish a regulatory framework were you can get "I sequestered CO2 credits" if your pumps
by pvarangot 5y ago
I think the problem with that approach is that it would be harder to establish a regulatory framework were you can get "I sequestered CO2 credits" if your pumps are out in the ocean and pumping the CO2 into deeper waters. The capturing facilities inland are easier to audit and regulate.
So yeah maybe it's better for the planet but since it's harder to regulate it would be tricky to get funding to build that if the potential profit comes from the government intervening to set a price for the CO2 removal you are doing.
- ncmncm 5y agoPumped water volume and pH are easy to measure, precisely identifying how much CO2 is being sequestered. These could be reported continuously via satellite link. It doesn't cost any less to keep a wind turbine and pump still than to leave it running, so there will be no incentive to cheat.
- ElevenLathe 5y agoI don't know anything specifically about wind turbine maintenance, but if its anything like everything else I know about, it probably does cost more to have 99% uptime than it does to have 80% uptime.
- ncmncm 5y agoConceded. But with automated reporting from metering equipment, it would be easy to tell when it stopped working, and if that meant the money stopped, you would be motivated to get out there and get it going again. We will need thousands of these things, all over the world. Maybe even millions.
- pvarangot 5y agoI was not thinking it was a technological challenge, I was more concerned about how useless governments in general are at regulating stuff that happens in the sea. There's no civil arm of the government that runs around in boats inspecting and certifying stuff.