Posted on 07/15/2015 10:25:21 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
It appears to be the obvious answer to the global-warming problem. We suck carbon dioxide out of the air and either recycle it into low-carbon fuel or stick it underground. As solutions go, it's simple, logical, even elegant. Also necessary.
"Scientists are increasingly convinced that we are going to need large-scale removal systems to fight climate change," says Noah Deich, founder of the nonprofit Center for Carbon Removal.
The key problem apparently isn't technological. Three startups are making significant strides in their efforts to create processes that could "harvest" millions of tons of CO2 from the air around us. The inconvenient truth is that no one wants to pay for it.
All three startups lack a practical business model. At this time, no one will pay them just to take CO2 out of the air. And the market for CO2 -- which has a variety of uses, from injecting bubbles into fizzy drinks to recovering hard-to-get-oil from tapped-out wells -- is limited.
What's more, if direct air capture of CO2 is to emerge as a meaningful climate solution, it would have to be built out at a global, industrial scale, costing billions of dollars.
(Excerpt) Read more at oregonlive.com ...
Of course no one wants to pay for it. Do you realize how much it would cost to imprison 30 million leftists ?
Isn’t this what trees and plants do?
Because it's not like we actually need plant life or anything.
The stupid. It hurts.
CO2 is 0.04% of the air around us. That’s a lot of sucking they’ll need to do to ‘harvest’ any appreciable amount. The energy needed for that probably adds new more CO2 than they take out as well...
We are already in a CO2 drought geologically speaking.
“The only difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.”
Trees help with unicorn overpopulation too... Send cash and grant money to the “National Republican Save the Planet” Foundation...
If everyone plants a tree we could save billions.
They would rather trade trillions of dollars in carbon derivatives than spend a few billion ACTUALLY solving the problem? I guess that’s all we need to know...
These scientists are morons. If you make the atmosphere less dense, it will increase the temperature extremes. Or in idiot language, increase Climate Change. We want a more dense atmosphere to buffer us from the intense extremes of daylight and night time. Otherwise we are living on Mars. Frozen solid at night, and melted to liquid during the day.
Have none of these fatuous morons figured out that reducing CO2 also reduces the release of oxygen? Plants and animals are symbiotic. That is the nature of things. The more
co2 is created the more O is released into the atmosphere by plants consuming co2.
We already have a method of harvesting CO2 out of the air, it’s called TREES!!!!
Maybe they should consider outsourcing this to trees and plants....
There isn’t an app for that?
It would have to have roughly the market value of gold to make “mining” CO2 feasible.
From “answers.com”
It depends on where you buy it, and how much you buy but it should be beetween .75-1.25$ a pound
Divide that by 14.6 troy ounces per (avoir) pound.
It’s about 7 cents a troy ounce.
So no big deal, only about .000006 times as much as gold.
and NASA predicts a new mini-ice age over the next 20-30 years.
I hope NO ONE ever pays for it!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.