TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Commercial Plant Starts Pulling Carbon from the Air

26 pointsby sandinmyjointsover 1 year ago

10 comments

uoaeiover 1 year ago
This kind of direct air capture that relies on consuming CO2 from diffuse, open-air atmosphere conditions will never be effective enough to be worth it. The concentration is simply too low, and the atmosphere too large. The costs quoted in the article are 5-10x other carbon mitigation technologies (presumably not even accounting for carbon intensities in the mining and logistics necessary to produce such facilities).<p>However targeted, point-source applications that are effectively scrubbers for carbon-intense processes make a lot of sense because of the opportunities for high-concentration collection and recirculation for multiple passes across the substrate.<p>I&#x27;m wondering if Heirloom is putting any effort into the latter approach. The article only reports on open-air facilities.
评论 #38207367 未加载
exabrialover 1 year ago
The most valuable carbon capture would be to do something that turns atmospheric co2 into a solid construction material, like bricks.<p>Reading between the lines what I&#x27;m saying is: Your benchmark is to do better than wood. If you can make bricks faster than a tree can grow wood, this will become an investment rather than money pit.
评论 #38207589 未加载
评论 #38207292 未加载
评论 #38208050 未加载
sdflhasjdover 1 year ago
This appears to me like an elaborate &quot;carbon laundering&quot; scheme?<p>Producing concrete involves decomposing limestone into calcium oxide and CO2, which is done in a furnace powered by fossil fuels and then just released into the atmosphere. Concrete cures by capturing <i>some</i> of that CO2 again.<p>This plant takes more limestone, decomposes it using &quot;renewable energy&quot; (i.e power that could have been used to displace non-renewable sources, but isn&#x27;t), but stores the CO2 in a tank, which is then just put back into concrete. Concrete that would have naturally slightly offset itself anyway?<p>The net effect is surely just a bit worse than nothing?
评论 #38212318 未加载
mynameishereover 1 year ago
Seems like recreating coal forests would be relatively sane. Everyone likes bogs.
评论 #38211956 未加载
DustinBrettover 1 year ago
Good they are finally starting this. Ever since I heard that this won&#x27;t work cause it&#x27;s too small, I started thinking that this will be what saves us after we go way over the edge as humanity. Hopefully I am wrong, but if not then hopefully at least we see many more of these to try and save ourselves at the 11th hour.
评论 #38207515 未加载
评论 #38207586 未加载
uoaeiover 1 year ago
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.li&#x2F;AZ1fA" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.li&#x2F;AZ1fA</a>
azinman2over 1 year ago
My bet is on geo scale engineering to mitigate temperature. Full of risk, but a better plausible path than pulling out 450+ ppm.
eightlimbedover 1 year ago
... Or we could plant trees like chestnuts that take CO2 out of the air and provide lots of food to humans and animals.
vorticalboxover 1 year ago
We dump &gt; 36 billion tonnes of it a year, if you make it solid where exactly are you going to store it?
评论 #38208318 未加载
评论 #38208282 未加载
评论 #38210309 未加载
danbrucover 1 year ago
This is so pointless, they pull carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and then they release it back into the atmosphere. They use it to cure concrete the production of which released a comparable amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and which would otherwise just absorb about the same amount of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere during curing.