461–469 of 469 posts
I wonder how YC backed Prometheus Fuels will stack up. They claimed that they are able to sequester Co2 directly from the air for around 36 USD / ton [0]. If they truly can scale it at that price point, it seems very competitive. [0]: https://www.prometheusfuels.com/on-the-road/happy-earth-day-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are they really sequestering it? If I understand their tech correctly they are recycling it back into fuel which then gets burned and the CO2 goes back into the air? It’s a fascinating process but unlikely to undue our decades of harm.
Yeah, that's how I understand it also. But they are talking about putting it in (plastic) goods "that store it forever". So I'm thinking that they could just solidify it somehow and bury it in the ground? Feels fairly cheap? But I'm not clear on wether their price point includes the revenue they get from selling the carbon (in the form of fuels or plastic)? I.e, does it cost them 36 USD, or 351 USD? [0] [0]: 36 USD +…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>"Why cant we just plant more trees?" We can, and we certainly should, but that does not solve the problem because those trees will eventually die and that carbon will cycle back through the biosphere. Mankind extracted a ton of carbon from the ground, where it was locked away, and we put it back into the air. People are trying to find ways of putting all that extra carbon back somewhere where it won't affect the cyc…
no. Unless the tree vaporizes or burns, none of it gets back into the air. It is for all intents and purposes a permanent lock up. Mankind is the gatekeeper of whether to unlock this carbon prison in our choice to burn oil or wood. Trees aren't the complete solution and the reason why has nothing to do with the tree dying and releasing the carbon. What's going on here is that plants are converting CO2 into mass. A tr…
CO2 has mass. It's 1 carbon atom and 2 oxygen atoms. The idea there is new mass creation going on here is absurd. Study some physics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that's how I understand it also. But they are talking about putting it in (plastic) goods "that store it forever". So I'm thinking that they could just solidify it somehow and bury it in the ground? Feels fairly cheap? But I'm not clear on wether their price point includes the revenue they get from selling the carbon (in the form of fuels or plastic)? I.e, does it cost them 36 USD, or 351 USD? [0] [0]: 36 USD +…
$36 is the cost of the capital equipment and energy needed to remove the CO2 from the air. Just an internal metric. Not tied to sale prices.
That's so much better than what I could have thought!
Even though my skeptical self almost falls in the "too god to be true" category I see you mention on Twitter, I'm very excited about following Prometheus' progress :-)
BTW: Make sure to let people know when/if human-drinkable ethanol "fuels" from Co2 are available for order! ;-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
no. Unless the tree vaporizes or burns, none of it gets back into the air. It is for all intents and purposes a permanent lock up. Mankind is the gatekeeper of whether to unlock this carbon prison in our choice to burn oil or wood. Trees aren't the complete solution and the reason why has nothing to do with the tree dying and releasing the carbon. What's going on here is that plants are converting CO2 into mass. A tr…
> converting CO2 into mass CO2 has mass. It's 1 carbon atom and 2 oxygen atoms. The idea there is new mass creation going on here is absurd. Study some physics.
Either way it's a technicality. I obviously meant "solid mass." CO2 must be converted to solid mass. Any person of normal brain power would've been able to figure out what I meant without delving into pointless pedantry.
Go study humans and manners you lack experience with both.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> converting CO2 into mass CO2 has mass. It's 1 carbon atom and 2 oxygen atoms. The idea there is new mass creation going on here is absurd. Study some physics.
Your attitude is childish, immature and spineless. Someone like you wouldn't have the balls to say that in real life so you take it out anonymously on forums. Either way it's a technicality. I obviously meant "solid mass." CO2 must be converted to solid mass. Any person of normal brain power would've been able to figure out what I meant without delving into pointless pedantry. Go study humans and manners you lack exp…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your attitude is childish, immature and spineless. Someone like you wouldn't have the balls to say that in real life so you take it out anonymously on forums. Either way it's a technicality. I obviously meant "solid mass." CO2 must be converted to solid mass. Any person of normal brain power would've been able to figure out what I meant without delving into pointless pedantry. Go study humans and manners you lack exp…
It isn't converted into solid mass either. Study chemistry. Clueless.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, planting trees sequesters co2 into the biosphere. That is not good enough, we need to be sequestering co2 into the geosphere if we want to remove it from the equation
I'm sure it's been mentioned elsewhere here already by someone, but I've always thought that converting felled 'sequestration stock' to bio-char and making terra preta out of it would be win-win-win, as it could then be used to improve desertified land. As much as CO2 emissions befear me, so too does increasingly poor topsoil, globally. - ed I'm not even sure we'd need to wait for trees to mature either - we just nee…
There's a few "plant trees" or "terraform the sahara" comments in here. For some context, if we planted trees wherever we could around the world we can only undo a decades worth of emissions[0]. Not only that but it would still take a century for the trees to reach maturity. Our use of technology threw nature out of balance and we need to use technology to get the balance back again. [0] https://science.sciencemag.or…
I'm working on agri-forestry and biochar reactors on a hobby farm. Hybrid poplars mature within a decade, and a biochar reactor is a net-energy producing reaction that produces soil improving char as a byproduct. It won't save the world on it's own, but trees can be leveraged in powerful ways.