I don’t know how one even *emit* 1 ton of CO2 for just $36
-
-
-
Animals do it for free
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Would this actually be net negative emissions if the generated fuel isn’t used then? Is this a way to reduce the existing CO2 in the air faster than the world biomass removes it?
-
The unburned fuel is indeed carbon negative, can’t speak to sequestration rates relative to biomass. I would suspect that factoring the nutrient and water requirements for plant growth, this would still be competitive from an overall resource and cost perspective.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Also wow their retro art is cool
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is what
#CarbonCredits should be made up ofThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
$36 is only after they resell the carbon for it to be emitted back into the air. Their capture cost without having it re-emitted would be much higher.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Anyone else getting Theranos vibes? I’d love to believe this but seems too good to be true
-
It’s too good to be true.
- Show replies
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.