Green Energy

2175 readers

89 users here now

everything about energy production

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

poVoq

SteveKLord

Scientist Discover How to Convert CO2 into Powder That Can Be Stored for Decades (www.scientificamerican.com)

submitted 9 months ago by sodalite to c/energy

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Xanis@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Isn't the whole point of better technology to create newer and more efficient ways of doing things? Thus wouldn't it be feasible to push that energy back in or back out using methods that may use the same amount of energy, though yield far greater results? I don't know enough about this field, though it makes sense to me that modern tech, and developing tech, must be better than their counterparts two centuries past, and even 10 years ago.

I understand any system requires energy to be used. It's the amount of energy per X unit that makes the difference.

Or am I wrong? Legitimately curious.

[–] Spzi@lemm.ee 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Thus wouldn’t it be feasible to push that energy back in or back out using methods that may use the same amount of energy, though yield far greater results?

Yes, it's possible to improve efficiency, up to a limit set by thermodynamics. In this video, a scientist (granted, astrophysicist) talks about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBN9JeX3iDs

Even if we built a 100% efficiency direct air capture system (which is impossible) to get down to 450 PPM CO2 levels by 2050, which is frankly too much already, and even in the more optimistic emission scenario -- all of that still demands roughly 5% of the planet's entire electricity production to be diverted to these machines.

While capture is necessary, it will physically not suffice. We have to stop emitting more; keep fossil fuels in the ground.

[–] doppelgangmember@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Preventative medicine for the Earth basically