As long as we are still burning fossil fuels to generate energy, the idea of capturing the CO2 from the atmosphere is a joke. It would require more than all the energy we have generated since the beginning of the industrial age. Or millions of years of growing non-rotting trees.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
One exception: Gasification, followed by ploughing in charcoal (“biochar”), is actually a net carbon negative way to burn fossil fuels while extracting CO2 from the atmosphere. But generally, yeah, those proposals about artificial trees or algae are implausible scifi.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @delysis
You need to "plough" it in deep enough to ensure that it will not get in contact with atmospheric oxygen. And do you know how much biomass you'll need to get enough coal to fill in ALL the fossil fuel deposits we emptied?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
>> atmospheric oxygen No, that’s among the notable things about biochar, it’s stable in the ground near the surface. Added benefit, it helps with nutrient retention. Not claiming this is superior to converting our fossil fleet, but as an appropriate tech for devel world, neat.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @delysis
I’d be scared that the next wildfire is going to put itback into the atmosphere?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
Hmmm...maybe. Modernity learned about biochar’s properties from studying soil bearing biochar over a thousand years old, so clearly some of it is sticking around.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
Ok, that is a good point!
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.