• alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Why comment if you don’t understand physics. I’m not saying turn the carbon into hydrocarbons, which is wat you are implying.

    Carbon sequestration takes way less energy than the energy released during burning.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Why comment when you’re just randomly going to claim that ther person you disagree with must not know the subject because they disagree with you?

      Sure, don’t convert back to hydro carbons. Where are you going to store all that CO2 in a way that you know it guaranteed won’t escape?

      Do you have any idea how much CO2 you’re talking about? Are you going to store it in high pressure tanks? Are you going to freeze it maybe and put it in caves? Pump the gas underground and pray it won’t sleep out?

      The reason that I’m talking about converting it back to hydrocarbons is exactly that: you need to store it somewhere stable and reliable. For the incredible amounts that we have to store, there aren’t that many options beyond making hydro carbons and storing those

      • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Perhaps read an introductory article on carbon storage, or ask ChatGPT:

        Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): This involves capturing CO₂ emissions from industrial sources, transporting it, and storing it underground in geological formations.

        Direct Air Capture (DAC): This technology captures CO₂ directly from the air and stores it underground or uses it in industrial processes

        It’s a sad state of affairs that a fellow human being is more insufferable to talk to than an AI.