This does not eliminate the problem, it just sweeps it underground and could give a false sense of security letting humans continue business as is. We don't really know what it will do the the "underground". Kind of reminds me when we used to dump trash in the sea because if we couldn't see it (on land in dumps) then it was a viable solution. Besides, what do the fans run on (i.e. what is the net CO2 impact)?
This isn’t really a solution. It’s short term “satisficing.” Consider the concept of Deep Time. At some point in the future (how far out TBD) all that carbon will re-emerge. Maybe at that point we will have figured out how to deal with carbon - and nuclear waste - and garbage etc. But this simply kicks the can down the road for future generations to deal with. That said, it does provide nice air cover to continue with extractive m on et making and ongoing creation of gases that create climate change.
I am fascinated by this approach. I do wonder what the impact could be underground. I lived in West Texas for two years and not far from Midland. It’s wide, open country. I look forward to hearing more.
It's pragmatic assuming the power used for CO2 capture is renewable. It will take generations to complete the transition to a fully circular, renewable economy. Until then, this is a step in the right direction, leveraging the value of our current infrastructure.
Pragmatic. I recall a previous post at @Noahpinion titled, "build nothing country". I think it is good to read of something being built. Not just talked about.
At some point we will need to capture and sequester CO2 out of the air - either with DAC, with soil carbon, or something else. However - the energy required to do so is very significant - far more than is created by whatever put the oil in the air in the first place. There is simply no way (due to the laws of thermodynamics) to sequester the CO2 from burning oil, without using more energy than was in the oil to start with. I support developing the technology, because - once we have more energy than we use, and its ALL renewable, we'll need to undo the overshoot caused by the criminal inaction of governments (including in the US and AU)
Yikes, what the heck is going to happen to the earth with all that carbon dioxide being pushed down. This is not a solution, just a way to continue to use carbon based fuels. Very short sighted and not productive
I hope Occidental Petroleum will succeed. The project is very interesting and useful for our society.
Climate scientists think it's a terrible idea: https://twitter.com/JKSteinberger/status/1638464093261529088?t=8FI1WVffXXTZOk_4SH1BUg&s=19
The ipcc report ranks carbon capture and storage as one of the worst options we have, both low potential impact and high investment cost: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/figures/summary-for-policymakers/figure-spm-7/
In the meantime, fossil fuel companies keep investing in it. So by publicizing it, you're helping them.
This does not eliminate the problem, it just sweeps it underground and could give a false sense of security letting humans continue business as is. We don't really know what it will do the the "underground". Kind of reminds me when we used to dump trash in the sea because if we couldn't see it (on land in dumps) then it was a viable solution. Besides, what do the fans run on (i.e. what is the net CO2 impact)?
This isn’t really a solution. It’s short term “satisficing.” Consider the concept of Deep Time. At some point in the future (how far out TBD) all that carbon will re-emerge. Maybe at that point we will have figured out how to deal with carbon - and nuclear waste - and garbage etc. But this simply kicks the can down the road for future generations to deal with. That said, it does provide nice air cover to continue with extractive m on et making and ongoing creation of gases that create climate change.
I am fascinated by this approach. I do wonder what the impact could be underground. I lived in West Texas for two years and not far from Midland. It’s wide, open country. I look forward to hearing more.
It's pragmatic assuming the power used for CO2 capture is renewable. It will take generations to complete the transition to a fully circular, renewable economy. Until then, this is a step in the right direction, leveraging the value of our current infrastructure.
This is a Kenesyan approach: bury money and pay people to unhearth it to keep the wheel running. But, will Gaya be deceived as they try with us?
Pragmatic. I recall a previous post at @Noahpinion titled, "build nothing country". I think it is good to read of something being built. Not just talked about.
At some point we will need to capture and sequester CO2 out of the air - either with DAC, with soil carbon, or something else. However - the energy required to do so is very significant - far more than is created by whatever put the oil in the air in the first place. There is simply no way (due to the laws of thermodynamics) to sequester the CO2 from burning oil, without using more energy than was in the oil to start with. I support developing the technology, because - once we have more energy than we use, and its ALL renewable, we'll need to undo the overshoot caused by the criminal inaction of governments (including in the US and AU)
Yikes, what the heck is going to happen to the earth with all that carbon dioxide being pushed down. This is not a solution, just a way to continue to use carbon based fuels. Very short sighted and not productive