While I'm not saying this whitepaper is wrong, keep in mind that this is done by Carbon Engineering who receive funding from people and organizations like N. Mu

While I'm not saying this whitepaper is wrong, keep in mind that this is done by Carbon Engineering who receive funding from people and organizations like N. Murray Edwards[1], Chevron Corporation, Occidental Petroleum and BHP[2] which either have hands deep in the oil or mining market, among other things. There is financial incentive to provide results that are in-line with what your funders want, and it's nothing new that this kind of thing has been, and still is being done. It's just hard to prove often. So as with all science, consult multiple whitepapers, including ones that don't have direct or borderline not indirect funding from those who have financial incentive to get a result that increases revenue or similar, to get a clearer idea of the probability that the topic isn't incorrect or what have you. As an aside, whether it's right or wrong (since it's a heated topic), I feel these videos demonstrate at least the possibility of companies playing with these kinds of things. They're amusing to watch, if nothing else, in my opinion: https://youtube.com/watch?v=MondapIjAAM https://youtube.com/watch?v=MondapIjAAM and https://youtube.com/watch?v=EIezuL_doYw https://youtube.com/watch?v=EIezuL_doYw [1] https://www.cheminst.ca/magazine/article/out-of-thin-air/ https://www.cheminst.ca/magazine/article/out-of-thin-air/ [2] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-bcs-carbon-engineering-secures-68-million-to-commercialize-c0/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-bcs-carbon-...