3 ms·

> A major hurdle facing companies venturing into this space is determining if it’s working at all. > But “That’s only the first piece of the puzzle, [because t

by palata 2y ago

> A major hurdle facing companies venturing into this space is determining if it’s working at all. > But “That’s only the first piece of the puzzle, [because then you] have to complete the sequestration process,” says Calabrese, who adds, “What happens [next] to weathering products as they move from soils to the ocean is largely unknown.” That seems to be the state of the science. Now let's compare it to what startups do: > Other companies, such as [...], aim to lock down hundreds of thousands of tons of CO2 within the next few years based on their own carbon counting methods. I really, really wish it worked, but at the moment it sounds like a nice way for companies to feel good by buying carbon credits to startups that still haven't proven not just that it works, but that there may actually be a way to know whether or not it works.

PaulHoule 2y ago
Exactly. If you trap the CO2 in a metal organic framework, say, and then compress it to 2,000 psi and inject it into a well there is some question over whether it will stay underground for the next 10,000 years. But seriously you can measure the gas while it is being pumped and know you won't see it again for a long time. Nature-based and other distributed schemes have potential but you have little chance of knowing if they work unless you did them in a big enough way that it would have a visible impact (could maybe be done with iron fertilization) You can pay a small amount of $ (say $20 a tonne) for junk carbon credits or pay at least $100 a tonne for ones that are certain in value. Note $100 a tonne on CO2 is $1 a gallon of gas. People would bitch about a $1 a gallon gas tax but having lived with gas more than $1 more expensive than today I find it hard to believe it would change driving behavior. A real price on carbon that changes behavior (and can decarbonize more sources) is more like $400 a tonne. So long as there are cheap junk carbon capture projects though prices will be too low to attract real ones.

by palata 2y ago

PaulHoule 2y ago

Exactly. If you trap the CO2 in a metal organic framework, say, and then compress it to 2,000 psi and inject it into a well there is some question over whether it will stay underground for the next 10,000 years. But seriously you can measure the gas while it is being pumped and know you won't see it again for a long time. Nature-based and other distributed schemes have potential but you have little chance of knowing if they work unless you did them in a big enough way that it would have a visible impact (could maybe be done with iron fertilization) You can pay a small amount of $ (say $20 a tonne) for junk carbon credits or pay at least $100 a tonne for ones that are certain in value. Note $100 a tonne on CO2 is $1 a gallon of gas. People would bitch about a $1 a gallon gas tax but having lived with gas more than $1 more expensive than today I find it hard to believe it would change driving behavior. A real price on carbon that changes behavior (and can decarbonize more sources) is more like $400 a tonne. So long as there are cheap junk carbon capture projects though prices will be too low to attract real ones.