We burn carbon-based stuff like oil, coal and gas to give us energy and fart co2. It takes even more energy than we gained to convert X tons of co2 back to solid form.
Every single joule of energy spent on capture would have mattered more if it was used for electricity directly, and reduced fuel consumption for a power plant by the same amount.
It’s hard to see this as anything else than a greenwashing distraction intended to instill an illusion that emissions production can remain at its current level.
Iceland has loads of green energy though (geothermal & wind) and is too far from anywhere else to really transport it (although that would be nice!). So it is helping, and it is helping to advance the technology/engineering knowledge for the future.
The fracking ones being built by the oil companies are less beneficial… Better than not doing it probably, but not exactly green… So with you on those ones!
The most crucial part of the process is that you and i will be the ones paying for the energy used for carbon capture, but the fossil fuel companies will be the ones profiting from selling the energy.
Agreed, net/net energy usage reduction is more efficient. However, carbon capture and/or geoengineering are now unfortunately necessary in tandem with reducing emissions for humanity (and the other species unfortunate enough to be sharing this planet with our mistakes) to avoid the worst outcomes of climate change. We simply didn’t do enough soon enough, and several warming effects are already in motion.
And unfortunately, both climate deniers and activists alike have been fighting against additional funding and research in these technologies, so we’re pretty far behind in our understanding.
We burn carbon-based stuff like oil, coal and gas to give us energy and fart co2. It takes even more energy than we gained to convert X tons of co2 back to solid form.
Every single joule of energy spent on capture would have mattered more if it was used for electricity directly, and reduced fuel consumption for a power plant by the same amount.
It’s hard to see this as anything else than a greenwashing distraction intended to instill an illusion that emissions production can remain at its current level.
Iceland has loads of green energy though (geothermal & wind) and is too far from anywhere else to really transport it (although that would be nice!). So it is helping, and it is helping to advance the technology/engineering knowledge for the future.
The fracking ones being built by the oil companies are less beneficial… Better than not doing it probably, but not exactly green… So with you on those ones!
The most crucial part of the process is that you and i will be the ones paying for the energy used for carbon capture, but the fossil fuel companies will be the ones profiting from selling the energy.
Don’t they trade certificates, so they can pay for it?
Agreed, net/net energy usage reduction is more efficient. However, carbon capture and/or geoengineering are now unfortunately necessary in tandem with reducing emissions for humanity (and the other species unfortunate enough to be sharing this planet with our mistakes) to avoid the worst outcomes of climate change. We simply didn’t do enough soon enough, and several warming effects are already in motion.
And unfortunately, both climate deniers and activists alike have been fighting against additional funding and research in these technologies, so we’re pretty far behind in our understanding.