Posted on 09/10/2021 2:10:31 AM PDT by blueplum
Edited on 09/10/2021 4:05:12 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The world’s biggest direct air capture (DAC) plant is set to come online in Iceland on Wednesday. The moment is an important one in developing new technologies to help suck carbon dioxide out of the air—but raises a whole host of questions on the future of how we’re going to put those technologies to use.
The Orca plant, located about 20 miles (30 kilometers) southeast of the capital of Reykjavík, uses large industrial vacuums to remove carbon dioxide from the air. The plant’s owners and operators, a Swiss startup called Climeworks, said that the plant can remove 4,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year...
How many trees can do this for free?
I just checked. 160 trees will do this job for free.
Here's something. I read that we have 3 times the trees here in NYS as we had in 1800. Goes without saying that we NEED more co2. How hard is that to understand.
160 trees is about 1/5 of an acre of land.
So, for the sake of this giant machinary, taking up at least 1/5 of an acre of land, we could have planed 1/5 of an acre for trees and gotten the same result.
You are correct. The best “machine” is a forest, something already in place, that could be greatly enhanced by wise forestry. Which is something the idiots in leftist environmentalism cannot understand.
If this industrial boondoggle is completed, we can add it to the list of unneeded nonsense of the “Chicken Little” era. Which is the a more accurate and realistic a moniker than “Climate Change”. Nothing more than the waste of resources in a propagandistic example of childish foolishness on parade.
These are the most IDIOTIC of the WORTHLESS VIRTUE SINGLING ideas. What’s next, whipping the oceans to keep them from rising?
http://www.tenmilliontrees.org/trees/
Um. Trees are great, but not that great. A mature tree captures about 48 pounds of CO2 a year. (Found that number in a couple of places).
That said, I wonder how much CO2 was produced to build this plant? And to operate it? Sounds like a good way to make money though. And get all sorts of government tax breaks along the way! (Like solar panels, etc.)
One tree is not that great, but a million trees is fantastic. We can always plant the trees that do the best job.
The trees also renew themselves once planted. It’s like we only have to plant one tree, one-time, and we will have a forever worker pulling carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere forever.
Where is this co2 being stored and what if it should ever leak out? This is about as bright as putting a running garden hose into your house to keep the water from flooding your yard.
The real issue on this matter is lack of understanding nature’s photosynthesis process where plants live on CO2 and H2O. Politicians need to take basic 6th grade science classes. Al Gore sure didn’t. The big dope.
the article says the co2 is turned into ‘rock’. Doesn’t say if they’re releasing the o2 or capturing it.
>>I just checked. 160 trees will do this job for free.
I hate it when people post obviously incorrect data, and then all the response just accept it as fact and build their responses and opinion based on that.
A typical tree will capture in the order of a few dozen POUNDS of CO2 a year (~50lbs on average)
So in order to capture 4000 TONS, or 80,000,000 of CO2 you would not need 160 trees, you would need about 1,6000,000 trees, not 160 trees.
Please folks, don’t make us all look stupid by making up or posting completely wrong data.
>>In summary, it can be concluded that the annual CO2 offsetting rate varies from 21.77 kg CO2/tree to 31.5 kg CO2/tree. To compensate 1 tonne of CO2, 31 to 46 trees are needed. In Europe, there are 300 to 500 trees per hectare. For calculating the figures on the Encon website, we assume a rate of 24 kg CO2/tree and an average of 500 trees per hectare. This means that 1 hectare of forest: 500 trees x 24 kg CO2/tree = 12,000 kg of CO2 offsets, i.e. 12 tonnes CO2/hectare.
https://www.encon.be/en/calculation-co2-offsetting-trees
typo: 1,6000,000 should be 1,600,000
It’s called the Kamala. Has only one purpose and is useless.
So some rough calculations. This plant would require 167,000 trees. At 200 trees (mature trees) per acre that is 833 acres. And once those trees are grown they can be cut down and turned into homes, paper, etc. Trees are a renewable resource!
The state of Georgia has over 24.2 Million acres of forest!
BTW - manmade carbon dioxide makes up something like .25% of the total effective greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. I showed this to my kiddos years ago.
Got 100 pennies and laid them on the table. Then got some white-out and put a dab to cover 1/4 of one of the pennies.
Okay kids - THIS is what everybody is so excited about when it comes to climate change! Even if they could cut it by half - how much of a difference do you think it will make?
So, 183,333 trees a year. Maybe 100 acres of forest? Wonder how many trees they killed clearing for this “plant”.
What a colossal waste of money.
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.