Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Carbon dioxide capture from open air using covalent organic frameworks

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 62 posts

Re: Carbon dioxide capture from open air using covalent organic frameworks

#41

Post by bryanlarsen »

lm28469 wrote: post #37
bryanlarsen wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point we need net-zero. Degrowth cannot get us to 0, nor can it get us anywhere close to zero.

See the problem is that we want to continue doing everything in the exact same way without giving up on any single little eccentricity we have no matter how ridiculous and how stupidly unsustainable they are, not a single damn thing Degrowth is also stopping to eat tomatoes in the middle of January instead of importing them from the other side of the world, or not eating fucking salmon when you live in South Africa,…

And by making all of those changes you'll lower carbon emissions by about 10%.

OTOH, switching to zero-carbon electricity and zero-carbon transportation would lower carbon emissions by 60%.

Re: Carbon dioxide capture from open air using covalent organic frameworks

#42

Post by lm28469 »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #41
lm28469 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See the problem is that we want to continue doing everything in the exact same way without giving up on any single little eccentricity we have no matter how ridiculous and how stupidly unsustainable they are, not a single damn thing Degrowth is also stopping to eat tomatoes in the middle of January instead of importing them from the other side of the world, or not eating fucking salmon when you live in South Africa,…

And by making all of those changes you'll lower carbon emissions by about 10%. OTOH, switching to zero-carbon electricity and zero-carbon transportation would lower carbon emissions by 60%.

> switching to zero-carbon electricity and zero-carbon transportation would lower carbon emissions by 60%

Is the 0 carbon mining and 0 carbon steel in the room with us right now ?

What about the 0 carbon asphalt ? 0 carbon tires ? 0 carbon cement to build your 0 carbon power plant ? 0 carbon plastic to build your 0 carbon solar panels ?

fyi steel is still made with coke, 1700s century style, and nothing is even close to ready to replace it, and you need it in virtually every car and building

When you actually look into it you will quickly realise it raises way more questions than it brings answers. And then you realise we already mined all the easy shit, now it's getting harder and harder to find the good stuff, harder meaning more energy intensive, it also means more soil to go through which means more chemicals to use (and guess what, most of it is petrol derivates), which means more tailing dams, more pollution, more wild life ecosystems destroyed, &c.

Anyone looking into the problem with an ounce of good faith cannot reach a conclusion as simple as yours. If you're still at the "electric cars " will save us I envy you, life was simpler back then

Re: Carbon dioxide capture from open air using covalent organic frameworks

#43

Post by danbruc »

lm28469 wrote: post #40
danbruc wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Optimistically [1] 200 g can capture 250 kg carbon dioxide per year, at the expense of heating the material almost 28,000 times from ambient to 60°C. And that still leaves you with 139 m³ of carbon dioxide gas, what do you do with that? [1] 2.05 mmol/g at half capacity equals 45 mg/g per cycle, and ignoring heating and cooling times one can fit 27,976.6 cycles into a year. Overall that is 1.262 kg/g/y.

Cool, we only produced 37 000 000 000 tonnes of co2 in the last 100 years

That is last year alone. Over the last 100 years it is probably more like 50 times that.

Re: Carbon dioxide capture from open air using covalent organic frameworks

#44

Post by lm28469 »

danbruc wrote: post #43
lm28469 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cool, we only produced 37 000 000 000 tonnes of co2 in the last 100 years

That is last year alone. Over the last 100 years it is probably more like 50 times that.

Indeed, that's per year: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions

Re: Carbon dioxide capture from open air using covalent organic frameworks

#45

Post by bryanlarsen »

lm28469 wrote: post #42
bryanlarsen wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And by making all of those changes you'll lower carbon emissions by about 10%. OTOH, switching to zero-carbon electricity and zero-carbon transportation would lower carbon emissions by 60%.

> switching to zero-carbon electricity and zero-carbon transportation would lower carbon emissions by 60% Is the 0 carbon mining and 0 carbon steel in the room with us right now ? What about the 0 carbon asphalt ? 0 carbon tires ? 0 carbon cement to build your 0 carbon power plant ? 0 carbon plastic to build your 0 carbon solar panels ? fyi steel is still made with coke, 1700s century style, and nothing is even close…

IMO, my solution is far less simple and hand-wavy than yours is. I can point to several books with solutions on how to get from my 60% solution to a full zero-carbon future.

There is no degrowth based path that gets us to 0 carbon except for degrowth to 0 humans.

Re: Carbon dioxide capture from open air using covalent organic frameworks

#46

Post by ryandvm »

lm28469 wrote: post #36
nozzlegear wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Degrowth doesn't work either, it's not a solution and nobody will ever go for it. From the abstract of Reviewing studies of degrowth: Are claims matched by data, methods and policy analysis? : > (2) the large majority (almost 90%) of studies are opinions rather than analysis; > (3) few studies use quantitative or qualitative data, and even fewer ones use formal modelling; > (4) the first and second type tend to inclu…

> Degrowth doesn't work either It's literally the only mathematically viable option. Either you choose it and plan for it or you hit the wall and deal with the consequences. Just take a gpd per capita world map, superimpose it over a pollution per capita world map, and extrapole the impact of china+india+africa living like the average american or even the average european, it just doesn't work out, but it's coming ve…

It's not coming very soon because those populations are going to completely skip the phase where every household has 2 or 3 fossil fuel vehicles.

Re: Carbon dioxide capture from open air using covalent organic frameworks

#48

Post by nozzlegear »

lm28469 wrote: post #36
nozzlegear wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Degrowth doesn't work either, it's not a solution and nobody will ever go for it. From the abstract of Reviewing studies of degrowth: Are claims matched by data, methods and policy analysis? : > (2) the large majority (almost 90%) of studies are opinions rather than analysis; > (3) few studies use quantitative or qualitative data, and even fewer ones use formal modelling; > (4) the first and second type tend to inclu…

> Degrowth doesn't work either It's literally the only mathematically viable option. Either you choose it and plan for it or you hit the wall and deal with the consequences. Just take a gpd per capita world map, superimpose it over a pollution per capita world map, and extrapole the impact of china+india+africa living like the average american or even the average european, it just doesn't work out, but it's coming ve…

> Either you choose it and plan for it or you hit the wall and deal with the consequences.

That's the problem though, without a sea change in human behavior, nobody will ever choose it. As the paper I linked points out, degrowth is a political self-own. Nobody likes it, nobody wants it, and hardly anybody has even studied it properly. Planning on hitting the wall and dealing with the consequences is our reality, so studies like the OP have a real and practical use.

Re: Carbon dioxide capture from open air using covalent organic frameworks

#49

Post by pfdietz »

lm28469 wrote: post #38
pfdietz wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the microplastics bit has all the odor of an unhinged panic. There seems to be quite a lot of dubious science being done. For example, a few years ago there was a study that said we eat up to 5g of microplastics a week. This figure was widely quoted in the press, with images of a credit card (about 5g) held in chopsticks as an illustration. But critical examination of the paper and the methodology concluded it…

We find microplastics in foetus brains, if your immediate thought is "meh ok it's probably fine" you're already beyond saving, all of that for what ? Cheap gadgets, some convenience and comfort > humanity must be punished We're punishing ourselves right now... look at our food, 75% obese/overweight in the west, 15% of US population on antidepressant, life expectancy going down, testosterone levels dropping 1% per yea…

> We find microplastics in foetus brains,

That's another study I am skeptical about.

Re: Carbon dioxide capture from open air using covalent organic frameworks

#50

Post by lm28469 »

pfdietz wrote: post #49
lm28469 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We find microplastics in foetus brains, if your immediate thought is "meh ok it's probably fine" you're already beyond saving, all of that for what ? Cheap gadgets, some convenience and comfort > humanity must be punished We're punishing ourselves right now... look at our food, 75% obese/overweight in the west, 15% of US population on antidepressant, life expectancy going down, testosterone levels dropping 1% per yea…

> We find microplastics in foetus brains, That's another study I am skeptical about.

I imagine if you cherry pick everything that goes your way and trash the rest it makes a very nice little fairy tale in which we can continue on our merry way without ever facing any kind of consequences
Post reply on HN