3 ms·
I find it sad that the USA doesn't use more plasma burners [0] to get rid of waste. But, land is cheap in the USA, and the USA has a lot of land, so landfills
by OptionOfT 2y ago
I find it sad that the USA doesn't use more plasma burners [0] to get rid of waste.
But, land is cheap in the USA, and the USA has a lot of land, so landfills win.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_gasification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_gasification
- ianburrell 2y agoThe problem is that burning trash produces CO2 from stuff, like plastic, that doesn't degrade in landfill. It is net positive CO2. The ideal is to sequester the carbon in landfill. This assumes that landfill is capturing and burning methane, because methane is worse than CO2.
- userbinator 2y agoPlants will take the CO2 and put it back in the ground... more slowly.
- stetrain 2y agoOur measurements of the increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration already include the effects of plants taking CO2 out of the atmosphere.
- sitkack 2y agoYeah, would be a great way to consume free solar during the brightest part of the day. Electricity in -> bulk chemical feedstocks out and no long distance transportation, handling and disposal costs. The nice thing about plasma burners is that you can capture the resulting syngas and not just exhaust tons of CO2 into the atmosphere as with an incinerator.