The first commercial carbon-sucking facility in the US opens in California
1–10 of 111 posts
Re: The first commercial carbon-sucking facility in the US opens in California
#2"The plant is capable of removing 1,000 tons of CO2 a year"
So about equivalent to 100 hectares of forest?
Anyway, cool, another 50 million more of these facilities and we'll be at break-even.
Re: The first commercial carbon-sucking facility in the US opens in California
#3"The plant is capable of removing 1,000 tons of CO2 a year" So about equivalent to 100 hectares of forest? Anyway, cool, another 50 million more of these facilities and we'll be at break-even.
[dead]
Re: The first commercial carbon-sucking facility in the US opens in California
#4"The plant is capable of removing 1,000 tons of CO2 a year" So about equivalent to 100 hectares of forest? Anyway, cool, another 50 million more of these facilities and we'll be at break-even.
As another yardstick, it will cost about 2x the annual world GDP to mitigate all emissions this way. With normal amortisation rates and operating costs, it will be about 1.5x-2x more than entire energy expenditure worldwide.
I wonder if this is simply a scheme to siphon public money. What a good catch for Fox News!
Of course, if $100 per ton ever becomes a reality, then it's just 3% of world GDP and is probably affordable. But that's a pie in the sky "forward looking statement".
Re: The first commercial carbon-sucking facility in the US opens in California
#5"The plant is capable of removing 1,000 tons of CO2 a year" So about equivalent to 100 hectares of forest? Anyway, cool, another 50 million more of these facilities and we'll be at break-even.
As another yardstick, it will cost about 2x the annual world GDP to mitigate all emissions this way. With normal amortisation rates and operating costs, it will be about 1.5x-2x more than entire energy expenditure worldwide. I wonder if this is simply a scheme to siphon public money. What a good catch for Fox News! Of course, if $100 per ton ever becomes a reality, then it's just 3% of world GDP and is probably affor…
People on this technology forum seem skeptical that technology can improve or get cheaper.
Re: The first commercial carbon-sucking facility in the US opens in California
#6"The plant is capable of removing 1,000 tons of CO2 a year" So about equivalent to 100 hectares of forest? Anyway, cool, another 50 million more of these facilities and we'll be at break-even.
They talk about other plants doing over a hundred times as much, too.
You need to build small before you can build big.
Re: The first commercial carbon-sucking facility in the US opens in California
#7"The plant is capable of removing 1,000 tons of CO2 a year" So about equivalent to 100 hectares of forest? Anyway, cool, another 50 million more of these facilities and we'll be at break-even.
As another yardstick, it will cost about 2x the annual world GDP to mitigate all emissions this way. With normal amortisation rates and operating costs, it will be about 1.5x-2x more than entire energy expenditure worldwide. I wonder if this is simply a scheme to siphon public money. What a good catch for Fox News! Of course, if $100 per ton ever becomes a reality, then it's just 3% of world GDP and is probably affor…
> As another yardstick, it will cost about 2x the annual world GDP to mitigate all emissions this way.
How did you calculate the cost for this number? Is that supposed to be annual operating cost?
> it will be about 1.5x-2x more than entire energy expenditure worldwide
We could use non-carbon sources to triple energy production if we really wanted to.
Re: The first commercial carbon-sucking facility in the US opens in California
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
As another yardstick, it will cost about 2x the annual world GDP to mitigate all emissions this way. With normal amortisation rates and operating costs, it will be about 1.5x-2x more than entire energy expenditure worldwide. I wonder if this is simply a scheme to siphon public money. What a good catch for Fox News! Of course, if $100 per ton ever becomes a reality, then it's just 3% of world GDP and is probably affor…
People on this technology forum seem skeptical that technology can improve or get cheaper.
I think they just understand that this is very unlikely to work even with best case estimates from people with a direct financial interest in this working
Re: The first commercial carbon-sucking facility in the US opens in California
#9Did it cost more in carbon just for the construction workers to drive their pickup trucks to build this plant than what the plant will actually remove?
Re: The first commercial carbon-sucking facility in the US opens in California
#10"The plant is capable of removing 1,000 tons of CO2 a year" So about equivalent to 100 hectares of forest? Anyway, cool, another 50 million more of these facilities and we'll be at break-even.
They talk about other plants doing over a hundred times as much, too. You need to build small before you can build big.
Also need to build factories for these like they planned for SMR reactors. Mass produce and ship them out for installation.