11–20 of 180 posts
Tangential thought; aren't compressed gas companies who bottle CO2/Nitrogen etc. technically carbon capturing? Surely they have optimised their industrial processes, which could be repurposed into a large storage unit rather than a cast iron gas bottle?
It just might help to shed some light on something akin to the blockchain/machine learning hypecycle bubbles amongst startups.
Has the author heard of photosynthesis? He is making valid point that we would need more energy to capture but we have lot of energy we could use in daytime near equator. Fossil fuel are burnt just because they are easy to work with and could produce energy all the time, but we have lot of solar energy that is wasted.
I have an idea about genetically modifying algae to continuously synthesize and excrete cellulose or similar. In theory would only need sunlight and water to operate, and cellulose could sink to the bottom and collected. Anyone knows if this has been explored?
As someone currently dabbling in the space, this is great reality checklist for a majority of research papers (and, unfortunately, a large majority on commercial endeavours, too) on the topic. The author makes a solid delivery on his outset promise. It just might help to shed some light on something akin to the blockchain/machine learning hypecycle bubbles amongst startups.
I have an idea about genetically modifying algae to continuously synthesize and excrete cellulose or similar. In theory would only need sunlight and water to operate, and cellulose could sink to the bottom and collected. Anyone knows if this has been explored?
Algae biofuel has definitely been a thing that people have tried over and over again and it hasn’t happened after a few decades so presumably there is some issue with commercialization. Wikipedia claims algae has very high water requirements (>600L of water for 1L of fuel) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algae_fuel
The retort to this theory would be that a company with a lot of resources could simply invest in the new technology.
But with the level of lazy corruption in the world it seems possible that these entities might be suppressing the technology somehow.
Tangential thought; aren't compressed gas companies who bottle CO2/Nitrogen etc. technically carbon capturing? Surely they have optimised their industrial processes, which could be repurposed into a large storage unit rather than a cast iron gas bottle?
Has the author heard of photosynthesis? He is making valid point that we would need more energy to capture but we have lot of energy we could use in daytime near equator. Fossil fuel are burnt just because they are easy to work with and could produce energy all the time, but we have lot of solar energy that is wasted.
A plant is basically a self-healing, self-replicating CO2-capturing machine running off solar power and some chemicals.
Just planting a lot of plants and expecting they will efficiently capture a lot of carbon out of the air is going to lead to disappointment.
Solar has a problem that consumers tend to need more energy during the night. So the solution is to pipe electricity from somewhere east so everyone's electricity is piped in from say a location east where its still light.
I got the idea when I heard Singapore wants to run a cable to Australia to get solar because they are too small for renewables.
If if could work for those planners it might work elsewhere. People are talking about pumped hydro as batteries, that's good for storage but this is more of a on demand system.
Cool idea, probably unrealistic.
https://www.norskpetroleum.no/en/environment-and-technology/...