4 ms·

You could simply build one of these plants next to a concrete plant, which is producing highly concentrated CO2 to reduce that cost. (A lot of similar industrie

You could simply build one of these plants next to a concrete plant, which is producing highly concentrated CO2 to reduce that cost. (A lot of similar industries exist of course.)

rgmerk 3y ago
They’re saying that the synthetic gas will be carbon neutral. If you’re capturing CO2 that comes from an industrial process like cement production, turning it into methane, burning the methane, and releasing the combustion products into the atmosphere, from an accounting point of view either the gas isn’t carbon neutral, or the cement plant isn’t carbon neutral, and the process is still incompatible with achieving net zero emissions.
- alexchamberlain 3y ago
  Yes, I agree. On the other hand, - we need concrete, steel and other similar materials to build the transition to clean energy. * - we need to be able to store (and ideally transport energy) from renewable, intermittent sources, such as solar, and sources that are hard to turn off/control, such as nuclear and wave power. Although this doesn't solve all the carbon emissions, concrete production accounts for >5% of carbon emissions IIRC and energy production a whole load on top of that, so if this can make a significant dent whilst stopping some of the other environmental side effects of drilling for Nat Gas, is this not a significant step forward? * The Material World by Ed Conway is a really interesting read that explores some of these tradeoffs
- benj111 3y ago
  Isn't that like saying EVs aren't green because the electricity isn't. I'd say in this situation that the hydrogen is green, but the cement isn't. It's still capturing Co2 that would otherwise be in the atmosphere. Although I'm sure the cement manufacturers will let you know about the CC and imply its green. The cement company can still do its own thing to become carbon neutral.
  - rgmerk 3y ago
    Not an expert, but I’d expect that in the USA the IRA would treat them both as “not clean”, and in the EU the gas maker would have to pay the carbon price.

You could simply build one of these plants next to a concrete plant, which is producing highly concentrated CO2 to reduce that cost. (A lot of similar industries exist of course.)

rgmerk 3y ago

They’re saying that the synthetic gas will be carbon neutral. If you’re capturing CO2 that comes from an industrial process like cement production, turning it into methane, burning the methane, and releasing the combustion products into the atmosphere, from an accounting point of view either the gas isn’t carbon neutral, or the cement plant isn’t carbon neutral, and the process is still incompatible with achieving net zero emissions.

alexchamberlain 3y ago
Yes, I agree. On the other hand, - we need concrete, steel and other similar materials to build the transition to clean energy. * - we need to be able to store (and ideally transport energy) from renewable, intermittent sources, such as solar, and sources that are hard to turn off/control, such as nuclear and wave power. Although this doesn't solve all the carbon emissions, concrete production accounts for >5% of carbon emissions IIRC and energy production a whole load on top of that, so if this can make a significant dent whilst stopping some of the other environmental side effects of drilling for Nat Gas, is this not a significant step forward? * The Material World by Ed Conway is a really interesting read that explores some of these tradeoffs
benj111 3y ago
Isn't that like saying EVs aren't green because the electricity isn't. I'd say in this situation that the hydrogen is green, but the cement isn't. It's still capturing Co2 that would otherwise be in the atmosphere. Although I'm sure the cement manufacturers will let you know about the CC and imply its green. The cement company can still do its own thing to become carbon neutral.
- rgmerk 3y ago
  Not an expert, but I’d expect that in the USA the IRA would treat them both as “not clean”, and in the EU the gas maker would have to pay the carbon price.