this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2024
434 points (94.3% liked)
science
14307 readers
106 users here now
just science related topics. please contribute
note: clickbait sources/headlines aren't liked generally. I've posted crap sources and later deleted or edit to improve after complaints. whoops, sry
Rule 1) Be kind.
lemmy.world rules: https://mastodon.world/about
I don't screen everything, lrn2scroll
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yo this would be great for some actual proper carbon sequestration. Make some butter from the air and pump it back down into the wells.
It's like a very limited Star Trek replicator. It can make anything you want as long as it's butter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJslrTT-Yhc
So I have limitations with videos, but the argument that capturing carbon is costs more energy than it took to put into the air is valid as long as we're still dumping carbon in the air. But, we have to stop putting carbon in the air and we have to start taking it out again.
completely agree with you, but until the whole world stops dumping it in the air (classic) carbon capture is worthless. I'm interested if this thing of making butter can be worth it, because you're not just removing CO2, you are also making something that would have required farming a cow, which is much more resource intensive.
I guess we'll need some studies done on the topic