SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The World's Biggest Plant to Suck Carbon Dioxide From the Sky Is Up and Running:
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 from the atmosphere, powered by hydrothermal energy. Climeworks has partnered with a carbon storage company to take that carbon dioxide and store it deep underground, where it turns into stone (whoa) after about two years.
Unlike other carbon capture technologies that prevent carbon dioxide from being released from dirty technologies in the first place—which are generally attached to fossil fuel facilities—DAC plants like Orca present the possibility of removing some of the damage we've already done. In theory, we could dot the earth with plants like Orca, resulting in what are known as "negative emissions." These types of technology aren't ready for primetime at scale yet, but the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said we need them to help meet the target of limiting global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) outlined in the Paris Agreement (in addition to cutting emissions in the first place of course).
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 09 2021, @11:06PM (7 children)
The energy efficiency of these plants isn't enough to justify diverting green power away from the grid. Every dollar spent and every joule of energy consumed by these projects would be more effectively directed towards green power generation. We would need to eliminate fossil fuels before carbon capture becomes anything other than a net loss.
If you want actually effective carbon capture the best long term solution is to plant coral.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 09 2021, @11:37PM (5 children)
What you say may well be true. But, that wouldn't preclude further research, would it? Now would it preclude building such a plant that relies only on solar and wind power. What if it weren't attached to the electrical grid at all, but it ran when wind and solar energy were available? I see no harm coming from these plants. We've pumped billions of tons of carbon out of the earth, these can pump some thousands of tons back into the earth. It looks like something of a win to me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 10 2021, @12:19AM (3 children)
And yet again you are wrong.
Projects like these green wash and are used as fake positive PR to get people to do nothing. Just like in Aussie.
The amount carbon produced making the tons of steel, concrete, etc just to build the plant will mean it is in deficit for some time. I mean the amounts it is capturing are ridiculous.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 10 2021, @01:43AM
"Projects like these green wash and are used as fake positive PR to get people to do nothing."
True, but they also are necessary as prototypes for the tech in case we actually do need to build a million of these things.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Friday September 10 2021, @02:06AM (1 child)
These projects don't do nothing; they suck grants out of governments, and venture capital out of wealthy entities that need a massive tax write-off.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 10 2021, @12:09PM
So would worthwhile projects be those that result in efficiencies and cost savings, like making things cheaper and easier to make, that go back to wealthy entities? What is a project that "does something" by whatever metric you use?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 11 2021, @07:59PM
Carbon capture projects divert money away from green energy production that would otherwise reduce carbon production. Even if it has its own wind and/or solar generation, that is power that isn't going to the grid where it would be more effective.
We are still pumping carbon into the atmosphere. Pumping one ton back instead of not producing ten is a net loss.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 10 2021, @12:12AM
I not 100% sure but I think this plant uses geo-thermal energy to power itself?
Could be wrong, but such plants ONLY make sense at all (and perhaps not even then) if they do similar.
Although one has to wonder if you factor in the TCO (total carbon of ownership) whether this plant will ever make sense even if run optimally.