A few of my working notes on direct air carbon capture (DAC), and the implications for climate change: http://cognitivemedium.com/dac-notes
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @michael_nielsen
Excellent. More such ideas, please. It would be dangerous to rely on just one, even an excellent one, let alone the bad one that's current policy.
3 replies 1 retweet 33 likes -
I really like Adam's notes, and need to read them properly. Every time I start I end up with 20 open tabs & never make it past a few paragraphs.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @michael_nielsen @james_ough and
"I can't read your writing. It's too interesting!" is perhaps an unusual compliment. But true here.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Thanks! Faced similar tab proliferation issue trying to write it...
@DavidDeutschOxf, yes, I tried to cover ~all known ideas (and you wouldn’t believe what video is linked at the end of the 3rd post). But none as lucidly & coherently encapsulated as@michael_nielsen on DAC here!2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AdamMarblestone @michael_nielsen and
I love how you use this as a way of bounding pessimism without anchoring too much on the specifics — it’s hard to get people thinking along those lines! FWIW, (thermodynamic entropy of mixing bound) x (reasonable price of energy) does seem to be below $10/tonne for DAC itself:pic.twitter.com/AcWermV81H
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Yeah, people mix up "Is it _possible_ to solve?" with "And what's the best possible / most realistic approach?" They can't answer (b), which is a much more complex question, so get pessimistic about (a). Hard to get ppl out of this mindset.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @michael_nielsen @AdamMarblestone and
Have you looked in much depth into Herzog's analysis? It's much more pessimistic on the thermodynamics than Lackner. I must admit, I think it's probably just wrong (trees seem to be a cheap way of doing DAC, thermodynamically), but there's a lot of details.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Not in detail. But in their abstract: "our analysis of *existing* gas separation systems suggests..." w/ Fig. 1 reproduced from 1998 paper. No mention of electrical swing adsorption, metal organic frameworks, biology. So... just an extrapolation assuming no major breakthroughs.
-
-
Thanks, more or less my impression. They've published a bunch, and I suppose I should work through the most recent one in detail. I'm reminded of the people who asserted with great confidence 20 years ago various lower bounds on solar, all long since broken.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Yes. I think it may be spot on as far as practicalities of existing systems and how they would scale, but no guide as to future innovation.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.