Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[The Darkling Wolf]

Yeah, and even if it just postpones the eventual death of the earth by a bit, that's more time in which to research and implement better solutions.

[da_nang]

Hmm, extracting CO₂ from the air just to burn it again isn't going to fix global warming. It doesn't fix the energy crisis either, since they still need to input electricity.

I thought the reason we had a CO2 problem was because we're putting -new- CO2 in the air, carbon that has been trapped under the rock for millions of years. Just cycling CO2 that is already in the air shouldn't hurt anything more, should it?

Sure, but will the oil companies allow it? And if they do...

Imagine the oil companies being the only ones allowed to use this tech. Any CO₂ source would be a gold mine. You know what one of the biggest sources is? Humans. So begins the new dark area of CO₂ farms, humans put in machines and their sole purpose to generate more CO₂. The new Soylent Green. Because it's green energy, damn it!

But there are enemies. There is a resistance. Soon the new war will begin.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The War on Trees.

[miauw62]

Cant you just pump co2 into former oil veins?
This must sound incredibly stupid, but hey, we wont be annoyed by it there.

[Akura]

Hmm, extracting CO₂ from the air just to burn it again isn't going to fix global warming. It doesn't fix the energy crisis either, since they still need to input electricity.

I thought the reason we had a CO2 problem was because we're putting -new- CO2 in the air, carbon that has been trapped under the rock for millions of years. Just cycling CO2 that is already in the air shouldn't hurt anything more, should it?

Of course, that doesn't help with the carbon that we -already- pumped into the atmosphere. But are you really expecting a magical panacea?

Another problem with carbon dioxide is the massive amount of deforestation we've caused. Trees take the carbon from it, releasing the oxygen we need, but they can only handle so much.

Cant you just pump co2 into former oil veins?
This must sound incredibly stupid, but hey, we wont be annoyed by it there.

I'm pretty sure CO₂ is a gas, which means it's just going to float back up.

[miauw62]

Cant you just pump co2 into former oil veins?
This must sound incredibly stupid, but hey, we wont be annoyed by it there.

I'm pretty sure CO₂ is a gas, which means it's just going to float back up.

Not if you seal it.
And if the seal breaks, you'll have something that probably looks kinda awesome.

[Hanslanda]

Cant you just pump co2 into former oil veins?
This must sound incredibly stupid, but hey, we wont be annoyed by it there.

... Until it finds a way out...

[i2amroy]

Cant you just pump co2 into former oil veins?
This must sound incredibly stupid, but hey, we wont be annoyed by it there.

I'm pretty sure CO₂ is a gas, which means it's just going to float back up.

Actually C0₂ is heavier then the average weight of air, so if you concentrate it all in a single area that is free of wind then it should hold itself there fairly well. Of course why you would bother pumping it down into the ground when you could simply package in high pressure tanks and sell it to the people who are turning it into gas I don't know.

Of course, that doesn't help with the carbon that we -already- pumped into the atmosphere. But are you really expecting a magical panacea?

Technically if we implemented widespread adoption of the technology and managed to develop carbon extraction methods to the point where it was viable, then it's possible that we could pull more CO₂ out of the air then we put into it. At that point it would become a nigh magical panacea because as long as we could supply the energy through solar or some other method it would decrease the carbon content over time.


Also consider this. We now have the ability to manufacture fossil fuels. No more need to worry about the whole "Earth will run out of fossil fuels in the next 10/30/50/80/100 years" problem.

[ChairmanPoo]

Also consider this. We now have the ability to manufacture fossil fuels. No more need to worry about the whole "Earth will run out of fossil fuels in the next 10/30/50/80/100 years" problem.

Come on now. Hydrocarbon fuels have been sintetizable in lab settings for decades. The problem is doing this in an economically feasible manner (I doubt this thing constitutes one). The best of these "alternative" sources is biomass so far, and it has quite a few associated problems, some of them very big.

[i2amroy]

I will agree that biomass is the best source out there so far. However the three big things I see in this project are:
1) They are actively pushing its development to a useable point. The article mentions that they are already in contact with several areas to implement their systems, and that they plan to create an industrial level plant in the next two years.
2) The only things it requires to run on are air and energy. Given enough research that could remove the most of the problems with other methods of fossil fuel production (such as transport of all the materials used). This design could theoretically allow you to plop a generator down somewhere with some solar panels on it and generate gasoline, nothing else required.
3) The fact that it does something "green" by reducing the CO₂ in the atmosphere will allow it to be marketed much more then other technologies. I wouldn't be surprised if the products end up getting subsidized by the government or something similar.

[Loud Whispers]

Also consider this. We now have the ability to manufacture fossil fuels. No more need to worry about the whole "Earth will run out of fossil fuels in the next 10/30/50/80/100 years" problem.

Derp derp

Spending energy to make potential energy

Derp derp

[The Darkling Wolf]

Also consider this. We now have the ability to manufacture fossil fuels. No more need to worry about the whole "Earth will run out of fossil fuels in the next 10/30/50/80/100 years" problem.

Derp derp

Spending energy to make potential energy

Derp derp

Yeah, we should totally just be powering cars with solar energy, because we've perfected that technology and it's definitely more efficient than using that energy to create petrol to run them on.

[Valid_Dark]

yeah, by making manufactured fossil fuels, they're really just prolonging the problem, because it won't be an issue of "zOMG we're gong to run out soon, we should really start thinking about making cars run on renewable energy" but instead would keep using gas, as they can just make it whenever now.
But at least gas prices should drop because of this, *hopefully*

and @Darkling, I'd say no technology is really ever "perfected" as things can always be improved,  I'm sure they can be made more efficient / cheaper, it just hasn't been discovered how yet.

[The Darkling Wolf]

Yeah, but we currently have the infrastructure well in place to run cars on fossil fuels, the infrastructure to run on electric is sorely lacking. So right now at least, it's very good to be able to manufacture that fuel relatively renewably.

[Descan]

If the fuel is clean, meaning the only exhaust is CO2 and water (which seems to be what they are implying), and we can make it out of CO2, water, and energy, then because the infrastructure already exists and because it is efficient in terms of energy per litre, I'm all for this. It's not going to solve our energy crisis in terms of where the power comes from. That's what hydro, tidal, solar, wind and even nuclear is for. It's just that those would be inefficient to miniaturize for things like cars, trucks, tractors, etc. It's simply cheaper to use renewable fuel then to put money towards miniaturization research that could be used to replace our dirty energy production with the energy production techniques I mentioned.

Think of this not as energy production, but energy storage.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Cant you just pump co2 into former oil veins?
This must sound incredibly stupid, but hey, we wont be annoyed by it there.

Way ahead of you.