4 ms·

Of course there are alternative energy stores which have the capacity we need. What do you think we are using for energy storage now? Now we have huge piles of

Of course there are alternative energy stores which have the capacity we need. What do you think we are using for energy storage now? Now we have huge piles of coal, natural gas stored in huge caverns, massive tank farms storing petroleum products. So the question is can we convert the electrical energy when wind and solar are at maximum output into gases, liquids, solids. The answer is yes. One obvious gas is hydrogen. And if the liquids and solids include carbon then to be carbon neutral we need to pull as much carbon out of the atmosphere as we will put back in (carbon capture technologies). So it can be done. The problem is the higher cost than fossil fuels.

lettergram 4y ago
“Can be done” typically means “can be practically done” I can fly to the moon, if I had a hundred billion dollars. That doesn’t mean “I” can fly to the moon. These theoretical cases mean nothing.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  Funny that you mention a hundred billion dollars: > Australia's growing hydrogen sector has an investment pipeline of A$133–A$185 billion ($92-$128 billion), equating to 35% of the country's total non-renewable energy and mineral resource investment, state body Geoscience Australia said July 19.
Manuel_D 4y ago
The answer is no, actually. Pulling carbon out of the atmosphere is way harder than you think is is. The carbon in the atmosphere is at a very low concentration. The Sabatier process is presently only done with concentrated carbon dioxide that comes from industrial byproducts. Pulling it from the atmosphere is not efficient enough to be viable. Even producing the hydrogen is a challenge. Almost all hydrogen is produced via steam reformation, which emits carbon dioxide. Producing it through electrolysis remains difficult because electrodes corrode and lead to high maintenance costs.
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 4y ago
  If we go the carbon-capture route, it'll almost certainly be via bioengineering, since lifeforms are able to scale themselves up. Something like giant GMO algae farms in the desert.

lettergram 4y ago

“Can be done” typically means “can be practically done” I can fly to the moon, if I had a hundred billion dollars. That doesn’t mean “I” can fly to the moon. These theoretical cases mean nothing.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago
Funny that you mention a hundred billion dollars: > Australia's growing hydrogen sector has an investment pipeline of A$133–A$185 billion ($92-$128 billion), equating to 35% of the country's total non-renewable energy and mineral resource investment, state body Geoscience Australia said July 19.

Manuel_D 4y ago

The answer is no, actually. Pulling carbon out of the atmosphere is way harder than you think is is. The carbon in the atmosphere is at a very low concentration. The Sabatier process is presently only done with concentrated carbon dioxide that comes from industrial byproducts. Pulling it from the atmosphere is not efficient enough to be viable. Even producing the hydrogen is a challenge. Almost all hydrogen is produced via steam reformation, which emits carbon dioxide. Producing it through electrolysis remains difficult because electrodes corrode and lead to high maintenance costs.

rrrrrrrrrrrryan 4y ago
If we go the carbon-capture route, it'll almost certainly be via bioengineering, since lifeforms are able to scale themselves up. Something like giant GMO algae farms in the desert.