• StinkyFingerItchyBum@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Feels VERY innefficient, thus I suspect doomed from the start. Why pump water some distance to the device then from the device when you could just submerge the whole thing and save a ton of pumping energy? Better yet, place it where currents provide the pumping for free. You only need to pump the CO2 out as it’s captured.

    Also adding acid, then neutralizing by adding a base is added costs and input. Is there no means to recapture and reuse the acid and avoiding the base altogether?

    • x00z@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Did you read the article? It’s a project that isn’t meant to do much at the moment.

      At present the amount of CO2 this pilot project is removing is tiny – at most 100 metric tonnes per year – that’s less CO2 than a commercial plane emits crossing the Atlantic.

      They are using this project to see how effective they can make it and what its impact on animal life would be.

      • StinkyFingerItchyBum@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 hours ago

        I did of course, this isn’t reddit.;)

        It’s not a lab trial, it’s a field trial. There is a ton of on paper improvements before something like this moves into the field. It’s wasting resources. Think more, design more, then deploy and test in the field.