World's First 'Negative Emissions' Plant Has Begun Operation (qz.com)

In an effort to reduce the 40 trillion kg of carbon dioxide humans produce each year, three companies have been working to build machines that can capture the gas directly from the air. One such machine in Iceland has begun operation. Quartz reports: Climeworks just proved the cynics wrong. On Oct. 11, at a geothermal power plant in Iceland, the startup inaugurated the first system that does direct air capture and verifiably achieves negative carbon emissions. Although it's still at pilot scale -- capturing only 50 metric tons CO2 from the air each year, about the same emitted by a single U.S. household -- it's the first system to take CO2 in the air and convert the emissions into stone, thus ensuring they don't escape back into the atmosphere for the next millions of years. Climeworks and Global Thermostat have piloted systems in which they coat plastics and ceramics, respectively, with an amine, a type of chemical that can absorb CO2. Carbon Engineering uses a liquid system, with calcium oxide and water. The companies say it's too early in the development of these technologies to predict what costs will be at scale.

Comments

Calcium Oxide methodology?

[sensei moreh]

Carbon Engineering uses a liquid system, with calcium oxide and water.

Calcium oxide is most commonly made by heating limestone: CaCO3 -> CaO + CO2 Looks like all we're doing here is recovering the CO2 used to create the CaO

Indeed

[Viol8]

Unless they've found a seem of CaO nearby (which will still require fuel to be used to mine it) then it all seems a bit pointless. I suspect its true aim is to get venture capiltal to line some pockets and then after a few years they'll say "Oops, the maths doesn't work, but thanks for the money. First class to the climate conference in the Seychelles rocked!"

Re:Whataboutism and CO2

[Bing Tsher E]

So, if you don't mind losing the parts of the current land area that are near the ocean,

For the record, I don't mind. There will be unpleasant side-effects, of course, but as the people who don't mind decimating the economy of towns in the coal producing region must often rationalize "I don't live there."

If AGW is inevitable, we may as well look at the positive side effects. Flush out all that urban decay and blight on the east and west coasts. Flood those parasitic people off the Florida peninsula and let the native flora and fauna thrive again.

It's unfashionable to think this way, unless it's the right people being forced to change. Right?