• subtext@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The problem is stuff like concrete… the way to make new concrete emits a shitload of CO2, whether or not you use electricity or fossil fuels. So we either need to find an alternative to cement or we need to capture all that CO2.

    • Icalasari@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Plus, it’s not like carbon capture would be used in a vaccuum. It would be to supplement all other strategies

    • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is useless to capture it. It will diffuse back to the atmosphere at some point in the future. It must be transformed. Or we should stop producing it

      • subtext@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Except we have clear evidence that if it’s stored properly it will stay there for millions of years. The fossil fuels (mostly) did not emit carbon into the atmosphere in the millions of years between dinosaurs / algae and now.

        • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Sorry, but I don’t understand your point. You are made primarily of C, and you don’t emit C either, other than C that you get from food and you transform in CO2, luckily for you. Your C is safely stored in a variety of forms that do not contribute to greenhouse effect, until transformed by bacteria. C, fossil fuels and CO2 are very different things

          • subtext@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s the point, we are stores of carbon until the bacteria eats us. Trees are only a store of carbon until there’s a massive wildfire.

            Underground geological formations have been proven stores for carbon for millions of years, far more permanent than trees or people.

            As for the difference between carbon, hydrocarbons, and carbon dioxide, they’re all really the same when it comes to the CO2 emitted, so that’s where I was going with that. You are of course correct that people and fossil fuels are not yet carbon dioxide.

            • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              In your picture you are missing the part where CO2 is the fundamental compound to create life on earth, as it is the source of carbon to “create” all living beings, as well as fuel and oxygen source needed for many of them to live.

              Carbon capture is extremely expensive and inefficient, because it is thermodynamically disfavored. In the big picture ineffective, because we need to transform CO2, we don’t need to bury it. The solution is to reduce the amount of excess of CO2 released, and increase the processes that transform CO2