• astrsk@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    5 months ago

    It could be beneficial for densely populated areas, though. Because you have predictable airflow and low-hanging regions to implement physical capture and sequestering. We can do more than one thing at a time and targeted approaches combined with generalized approaches will yield faster results.

    • 3volver@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      In order for that we need more renewable energy, otherwise we’re just burning fossil fuel, producing carbon dioxide, and then capturing it. Solar, wind, algae biofuel, renewable diesel, green hydrogen, etc. We have to be careful how we use energy otherwise we’re just producing carbon dioxide to capture carbon dioxide.

      • mriguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        People keep complaining that solar and wind give us “too much electricity at the wrong time”, causing power prices to go negative (as if this is a problem). Having a beneficial process like co2 removal that you can do at any time of day (the co2 isn’t going anywhere) that would soak up all that energy seems like a win win.

        • 3volver@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yea, and one of the best ways to sequester carbon dioxide is by using algae. Algae biofuels are a great way out of the climate crisis. Use excess energy to produce algae biofuel, net negative emissions.

          • AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            But if it’s used as fuel, wouldn’t that typically return the CO2? Just about all fuels are burned, which creates the CO2, and you have to make sure the energy you use to make and transport the fuel is clean, too.

              • AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                How does it stay net negative? Carbon goes into the fuel, which is good, but doesn’t like all of it come back out when burned for fuel? My understanding is that these fuels can only really achieve neutrality, and that assumes clean energy used to make the fuel.