4 ms·

Every time I see technology like this, I wonder why there so much effort and publicity in capturing carbon from thin air, but no one seems to be interested in c

Every time I see technology like this, I wonder why there so much effort and publicity in capturing carbon from thin air, but no one seems to be interested in capturing carbon directly out of exhaust pipe?

jackmott42 3y ago
If you have any practical idea for either, please let us know.
_aavaa_ 3y ago
Because this fantasy allows fossil fuel companies to continue selling their products. Capturing CO2 in ppm quantities out of air is ridiculously difficult. Capturing at point of emission is easier/better. But it’s even better if you don’t produce it in the first place. See: https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/12/chevrons-fig-leaf-part-1-carbon-engineering-burns-natural-gas-to-capture-carbon-from-the-air/ https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/12/chevrons-fig-leaf-part-...
dmbche 3y ago
You might be interesting in reading about catalysors - that's what they do. Blocking more out of exhausts would choke the engine - although I'm sure there could be better set ups.
wasmitnetzen 3y ago
There are attempts at this, Stockholm's district heating operator has a pilot project[1]. [1]: https://www.stockholmexergi.se/en/environment-and-sustainability/negative-emissions/ https://www.stockholmexergi.se/en/environment-and-sustainabi... Disclosure: I used to work with them, though not on that project, and my current employer still works with them
marcosdumay 3y ago
Because what you should do with a large static exhaust pipe is to turn it off. And after you do that, you will still need capture from air. But on the company's side, it's probably because the companies that own large static exhaust pipes aren't interested on helping cleaning anything up.
- avmich 3y ago
  There are examples - and, I guess, a rather common practice in some places - cleaning up the exhaust from large plants. The company may not be interested until ordered by judge. Or resented an air cleaning bill. Or having loss of market when customers require ecology-aware approach. Sometimes companies aren't interested even then. Our job is to change this.

jackmott42 3y ago

If you have any practical idea for either, please let us know.

_aavaa_ 3y ago

Because this fantasy allows fossil fuel companies to continue selling their products. Capturing CO2 in ppm quantities out of air is ridiculously difficult. Capturing at point of emission is easier/better. But it’s even better if you don’t produce it in the first place. See: https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/12/chevrons-fig-leaf-part-1-carbon-engineering-burns-natural-gas-to-capture-carbon-from-the-air/ https://cleantechnica.com/2019/04/12/chevrons-fig-leaf-part-...

dmbche 3y ago

You might be interesting in reading about catalysors - that's what they do. Blocking more out of exhausts would choke the engine - although I'm sure there could be better set ups.

wasmitnetzen 3y ago

There are attempts at this, Stockholm's district heating operator has a pilot project[1]. [1]: https://www.stockholmexergi.se/en/environment-and-sustainability/negative-emissions/ https://www.stockholmexergi.se/en/environment-and-sustainabi... Disclosure: I used to work with them, though not on that project, and my current employer still works with them

marcosdumay 3y ago

Because what you should do with a large static exhaust pipe is to turn it off. And after you do that, you will still need capture from air. But on the company's side, it's probably because the companies that own large static exhaust pipes aren't interested on helping cleaning anything up.

avmich 3y ago
There are examples - and, I guess, a rather common practice in some places - cleaning up the exhaust from large plants. The company may not be interested until ordered by judge. Or resented an air cleaning bill. Or having loss of market when customers require ecology-aware approach. Sometimes companies aren't interested even then. Our job is to change this.