4 ms·
That makes me chuckle that they use CO2. It would look like a good idea only if they somehow compel their customers to buy only CO2 coming from a direct-air-ca
by henearkr 4y ago
That makes me chuckle that they use CO2.
It would look like a good idea only if they somehow compel their customers to buy only CO2 coming from a direct-air-capture facility.
Or even better, if they attach a small direct-air-capture device to their "bubble". (it would not need to be extremely efficient, as I understand that the CO2 is then captive of the storage [I'd add... in a normal operation mode... because we never know what can happen with incidents and that's why I push for DAC before it's too late and it's already everywhere])
- lolc 4y agoCapturing co2 from air is a waste of energy as long as there are chimneys discharging the stuff by the ton.
- henearkr 4y agoI agree, but wouldn't a partial PSCC (point source carbon capture) also legitimize the polluting industries? (I'm assuming here that not all of their emitted CO2 is long-term stored, otherwise of course that also solves another problem) Can we both fight for the disappearance of the chimneys, and depend on them? At the very least, we need to be ready for the absence of these chimneys as if it could happen overnight, for the simple reason that we really need for it to happen overnight (it won't, but that's bad, and we need to keep thinking it's bad). (I precise: I would be completely in favor of a total PSCC, it's just that I think that a partial PSCC for any chimney is a bad path)
- euroderf 4y agoTry looking at it this way: One CO2 capture is operational at scale, the price of its capture becomes a known quantity, and this can be used as a price point for determining a general carbon tax.
- lolc 4y agoThe original comment suggested to use CO2 captured from air for the storage facilities. Yet takes more energy to remove CO2 from the atmosphere than to remove it from exhaust. We'd be burning coal to extract CO2 from the air!