6 ms·

Which suggests to me that CO2 extraction from the air should be the next big target for innovation?

by kitd 3y ago

lozenge 3y ago
Who's going to pay for it? At 400ppm, you need a million cubic feet of air to go through your system to get 400 cubic feet of CO2 out. That has an inherent cost. Whether the CO2 is pulled from the air or from more concentrated industrial sources, the carbon sequestration industry would need to grow to the size of the fossil fuel industry (in terms of mass moved). But instead of extracting resources and selling them for financial gain, it will be a pure financial loss for an ecological gain. Under capitalism it's as impossible as water flowing uphill.
- Swenrekcah 3y ago
  It’s not impossible if you can earn credits that can be sold. This is why the majority of the world needs to agree on a carbon tax system, yesterday.
  - lozenge 3y ago
    What happens when people feel it's too expensive or disruptive and vote in somebody who undoes it?
    - owisd 3y ago
      Other countries are implementing carbon taxes on their imports from countries that don’t tax carbon so companies will end up paying it indirectly on import taxes if their own government doesn’t levy it.
      - lozenge 3y ago
        Oh the anti tax country won't pull out of the treaty, they'll just undermine it with dubious accounting, waivers, etc.
        owisd 3y ago
        why bother trying to achieve anything if someone might try to cheat.
  - aziaziazi 3y ago
    > not impossible > the majority of the world needs to agree Mmmhhh, not sure if betting on a world economic agreement to protect our climate and biodiversity is a good idea.
    - Swenrekcah 3y ago
      Are you expecting the world to overthrow capitalism instead?
      - aziaziazi 3y ago
        I dream about that but don’t expect it in any foreseeable future. Neither do I believe in a worldwide coordinated economic action when the goal is not money itself but common good.
      - master-lincoln 3y ago
        That would be more reasonable. Carbon offsets turned out to be not reliable because companies are gaming the system and an international way of making sure this does not happen seems unrealistic. But I personally expect things to just get worse and worse in the next few decades. Capitalism will not slow down and climate change effects will increase, driving migration into rich countries, causing societal uproar and reduced quality of life for everybody.
      - rcMgD2BwE72F 3y ago
        No need to overthrow it if capitalism collapses on itself. Green growth is a mirage if not a lie (see https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-what-is-esg-investing-msci-ratings-focus-on-corporate-bottom-line https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-what-is-esg-investin... for a primer)
- badpun 3y ago
  We actually already have water flowing uphill, in the pumped-storage hydroelectricity facilities. So who knows.
  - lozenge 3y ago
    Next you'll be telling me that clouds are made of seawater!
- bootsmann 3y ago
  > it will be a pure financial loss for an ecological gain Not true, under the current EU emissions trading scheme you can actually earn money by selling the certificates for the CO2 you remove. If you check the price of it you can see that well defined markets can actually get the power of capitalism to work in your favour, with the price jumping from $30 to $90 within last year.
  - rcMgD2BwE72F 3y ago
    I'd like to see some proof that these trading scheme work. I know how it is gamed, and how much speculators like them though.
roelschroeven 3y ago
CO2-extraction takes energy though, quite a lot of it. Using energy from fossil fuel for CO2-extraction is worse than doing nothing, since you're never going to extract as much CO2 as is emitted by the power plant. That leaves using clean energy, but clean energy is a limited resource. Using clean energy to replace current uses of CO2-emitting energy is likely going to be more effective than using it to extract the emitted CO2 back out of the atmosphere.

Which suggests to me that CO2 extraction from the air should be the next big target for innovation?

by kitd 3y ago

Which suggests to me that CO2 extraction from the air should be the next big target for innovation?

Who's going to pay for it? At 400ppm, you need a million cubic feet of air to go through your system to get 400 cubic feet of CO2 out. That has an inherent cost. Whether the CO2 is pulled from the air or from more concentrated industrial sources, the carbon sequestration industry would need to grow to the size of the fossil fuel industry (in terms of mass moved). But instead of extracting resources and selling them for financial gain, it will be a pure financial loss for an ecological gain. Under capitalism it's as impossible as water flowing uphill.

Swenrekcah 3y ago
It’s not impossible if you can earn credits that can be sold. This is why the majority of the world needs to agree on a carbon tax system, yesterday.
- lozenge 3y ago
  What happens when people feel it's too expensive or disruptive and vote in somebody who undoes it?
  - owisd 3y ago
    Other countries are implementing carbon taxes on their imports from countries that don’t tax carbon so companies will end up paying it indirectly on import taxes if their own government doesn’t levy it.
    - lozenge 3y ago
      Oh the anti tax country won't pull out of the treaty, they'll just undermine it with dubious accounting, waivers, etc.
      - owisd 3y ago
        why bother trying to achieve anything if someone might try to cheat.
- aziaziazi 3y ago
  > not impossible > the majority of the world needs to agree Mmmhhh, not sure if betting on a world economic agreement to protect our climate and biodiversity is a good idea.
  - Swenrekcah 3y ago
    Are you expecting the world to overthrow capitalism instead?
    - aziaziazi 3y ago
      I dream about that but don’t expect it in any foreseeable future. Neither do I believe in a worldwide coordinated economic action when the goal is not money itself but common good.
    - master-lincoln 3y ago
      That would be more reasonable. Carbon offsets turned out to be not reliable because companies are gaming the system and an international way of making sure this does not happen seems unrealistic. But I personally expect things to just get worse and worse in the next few decades. Capitalism will not slow down and climate change effects will increase, driving migration into rich countries, causing societal uproar and reduced quality of life for everybody.
    - rcMgD2BwE72F 3y ago
      No need to overthrow it if capitalism collapses on itself. Green growth is a mirage if not a lie (see https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-what-is-esg-investing-msci-ratings-focus-on-corporate-bottom-line https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-what-is-esg-investin... for a primer)
badpun 3y ago
We actually already have water flowing uphill, in the pumped-storage hydroelectricity facilities. So who knows.
- lozenge 3y ago
  Next you'll be telling me that clouds are made of seawater!
bootsmann 3y ago
> it will be a pure financial loss for an ecological gain Not true, under the current EU emissions trading scheme you can actually earn money by selling the certificates for the CO2 you remove. If you check the price of it you can see that well defined markets can actually get the power of capitalism to work in your favour, with the price jumping from $30 to $90 within last year.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 3y ago
  I'd like to see some proof that these trading scheme work. I know how it is gamed, and how much speculators like them though.

roelschroeven 3y ago

CO2-extraction takes energy though, quite a lot of it. Using energy from fossil fuel for CO2-extraction is worse than doing nothing, since you're never going to extract as much CO2 as is emitted by the power plant. That leaves using clean energy, but clean energy is a limited resource. Using clean energy to replace current uses of CO2-emitting energy is likely going to be more effective than using it to extract the emitted CO2 back out of the atmosphere.