Live data from Hacker News

Carbon Removal Technologies

carbon.ycombinator.com

271–280 of 682 posts

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#271
post #190

I know this is going to get downvoted but I have to say it: the problem is not CO2, the problem is CO2 alarmism. The models on which the IPCC predictions of doom are based do not match the data. Even the IPCC admits that in the AR5. The actual data says that CO2-driven warming is not enough to worry about. (Not to mention that the prediction of doom also depends on economic models which are even worse at matching dat…

You are correct

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#272
post #59

I would strongly suggest investigating the claims of http://www.innovationconcepts.eu/res/literatuurSchuiling/oli... that after mining, milling, and then being spread in the ocean, olivine rocks weather quickly and take out CO2. The estimated costs of large scale CO2 sequestration this way are surprisingly reasonable, and the technology is already available. Also the various ocean technologies are going to run into t…

I don't know how any scientists take this seriously. CO2 increases biological growth and metabolism, thus increasing the metabolizers who sequester CO2... Everyone undervalues the stabilization processes and overemphasizes the run-away processes - and the only reason I can see for it is that their jobs depend on this belief structure.

Because I know people only accept mainstream authorities as sources, unfortunately: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1v5I70Gt_NQ

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#273
post #4

...are stupid even to contemplate while we're still increasing carbon emissions. If you actually cared about the impact — and weren't just cynically cashing in on environmentalism's recapitulated caché — you'd be shorting big markets. The biggest threat to the world is unbridled capitalism, which VC's like you are incapable of abandoning. May as well ask a fish to bicycle. This post is a pitiable joke, whose highest…

Is that passion I hear? Censor him!

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#274
post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Studies on happiness--as hard as that is to objectively study--show it is more closely related to social status than absolute and total consumption. In other words, the SUV or sports car apparently has more to do with making people happy by making them look to be of higher social status than the actual utility of those goods. This is also demonstrated in the South Park episode Smug, which criticizes hybrids. From a p…

For talking about links between wealth and happiness, it matters greatly what absolute level of wealth you are talking about. Within first world countries, the link between between wealth and happiness is weak. But when comparing between countries that are rich versus on the brink of starvation, the correlation is one of the strongest known. This may seem contradictory makes sense if you think of it in terms of Maslo…

I think that's correct afaik, and it reinforces what I was trying to say: most ghg emmissions come from the absolute wealthiest individuals on the planet who do not allocate these resources efficiently with respect to human welfare/pursuit of happiness.

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#275
If anyone's reading this. I'm really passionate about this crossing of tech and environmental issues & awareness. I have a tiny carbon footprint myself, I am super conscious about everything: no car/no emissions/ tiny electricity and water bills compared to everyone else in the city/food&waste minimization etc

If anyone needs a developer and/or marketing engineer with a passion for automation (think very advanced Zapier) hit me up because I'd rather work with you than working for the next "Crypto currency company". Look at my profile for how to contact me!

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#276
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately there's no profit motive for this.

Of course there is, for companies with technology to reduce or reverse the carbon in our atmosphere there's a giant profit potential. This of course balanced by the interests of those protecting their current cash flows in established carbon releasing industries.

There's no innate profit potential for this technology. If the governments decide to pay lots and lots and lots of money to sequester carbon, then there's a giant profit potential for anyone who can do it. But note the "if" - as of now, there's no indication that they're going to do so; and if/when it comes to such an emergency that they will, they might as well nationalize (or 'globalize') that tech and implement the solutions at-cost without any meaningful profit for the owners of these technologies; if push comes to shove enough so that the major powers of the world will be willing to invest a nontrivial share of their GDP in fighting climate change, honoring international intelectual property agreements will be the least of their concerns.

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the appearances, it has a lot of potential. Iron is extremely plentiful and has a very large impact on the small systems it was tried. It is possible that inefficiencies take such a toil that it stops being viable, but it's not the opposition that make people think it can have a large impact.

There are reasons to think it may be effective. But I try to live by "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself – and you are the easiest person to fool." I want additional experiments to make findings robust. In particular, even if small fertilization inputs reliably lead to large biomass increases, we need to know how much of that added biomass sinks to the deep ocean before we know how effective it is…

Last I ran the numbers for that chapter, I determined that there simply isn’t enough ocean surface area to achieve the carbon absorption necessary, even if we used every underfertilized patch of seawater on the planet.

It was close, but it still came up short.

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#278
post #59

I would strongly suggest investigating the claims of http://www.innovationconcepts.eu/res/literatuurSchuiling/oli... that after mining, milling, and then being spread in the ocean, olivine rocks weather quickly and take out CO2. The estimated costs of large scale CO2 sequestration this way are surprisingly reasonable, and the technology is already available. Also the various ocean technologies are going to run into t…

I am working on a non-profit that is utilizing Schuiling's research and is actually getting this project done. We are scouting beaches right now for a "wiggle" tank, which is a sort of see-saw like device where we can gather data to affirm the real world dissolution rate. The chemistry, however, is sound that each 1 ton of olivine will sequester 1.25 tons of carbon. By the end of 2019 we hope to have our first olivin…

How elastic is the price of that olivine?

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#279

Anyone thinking about or considering working on these technologies owes it to themselves to read Charles Mann's The Wizard and the Prophet. Whatever you may think of the author's various statements on Peak Oil etc., the book is a worthwhile meditation on two very different approaches to our current crises. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34959327-the-wizard-and-...

Thanks for the recommendation. Could you explain a bit more in detail why you recommend reading it? I've read a lot of online resources (IPCC, wikipedia, different lectures on advanced weathering, pyrolysis/biochar etc) and have been looking to read a book related to the carbon dioxide problem.

Re: Carbon Removal Technologies

#280
post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So this might be a dumb question, but if I landfill paper instead of recycling it, does it degrade? If not, is that a poor man's form of carbon sequestration? A cursory glance suggests this is correct [1], though you'd need to know a lot more to say that it was more carbon efficient than recycling. [1] http://www.allaboutbags.ca/degradeinlandfill.html

Was the carbon not already sequestered when it was in the form of a tree?

I assume any serious paper production company replants the tree, so you start with a tree and end with a tree and landfilled paper.
Post reply on HN