Economy 52,844 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 This is awesome and apparently it's reaching a threshold where it may become economical which means adding many more wouldn't be an issue Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dynamite 66,595 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 I thought you meant plant as in flower Cool let's hope these become more common Like a poem said by a neydy in red Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 99,106 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 Damn, this is some game changing technology, the type that society can be defined before and after it, if it becomes a thing If you see me posting like crazy, I'm either bored or procrastinating. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mister max 18,480 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 Where did all of it go? I mean how/in what did they convert it or? Buy ARTPOP on itunes or smth? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeanWinchester 41,390 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 7 minutes ago, Economy said: This is awesome and apparently it's reaching a threshold where it may become economical which means adding many more wouldn't be an issue 2 minutes ago, Red said: Damn, this is some game changing technology, the type that society can be defined before and after it, if it becomes a thing I thought we're past the reversal of climate change but if these plants pop up the next 5 years maybe there is hope after all. Flyin' like a 1000 Doves Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Economy 52,844 Posted January 31, 2020 Author Share Posted January 31, 2020 2 minutes ago, Red said: Damn, this is some game changing technology, the type that society can be defined before and after it, if it becomes a thing Bill Gates had founded another company for a new type of cleaner safer nuclear (that relies on nuclear waste from standard nuclear plants instead of new uranium so it's also a form of recycling) Trump indirectly killed it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexanderMagno 10,746 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 And now I can see a future where the lack of CO2 in the air will be a problem (because humans are so good at balancing things ) (don't forget that our air is 21% oxigen, and more than that is actually bad for us). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 99,106 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 1 minute ago, DeanWinchester said: I thought we're past the reversal of climate change but if these plants pop up the next 5 years maybe there is hope after all. Oh yeah, definitely, the situation can’t get better but this can make it... less worse? If you see me posting like crazy, I'm either bored or procrastinating. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 99,106 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 1 minute ago, AlexanderMagno said: And now I can see a future where the lack of CO2 in the air will be a problem (because humans are so good at balancing things ) (don't forget that our air is 21% oxigen, and more than that is actually bad for us). With all the living beings and industries I highly doubt this can happen and if it does, just turn off the CO2 capture plants? This doesn’t sound like a real issue If you see me posting like crazy, I'm either bored or procrastinating. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mardy 260 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 1 minute ago, AlexanderMagno said: And now I can see a future where the lack of CO2 in the air will be a problem (because humans are so good at balancing things ) (don't forget that our air is 21% oxigen, and more than that is actually bad for us). Don’t worry. 40million trees ain't that much. Even with co2 capturing technologies, we won’t be able to affect the breathing air. After all the seas are the best co2 locks we have, capturing 70% of the co2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Economy 52,844 Posted January 31, 2020 Author Share Posted January 31, 2020 3 minutes ago, AlexanderMagno said: And now I can see a future where the lack of CO2 in the air will be a problem (because humans are so good at balancing things ) (don't forget that our air is 21% oxigen, and more than that is actually bad for us). This only pulls carbon it doesn't create oxygen Nitrogen (the main component that is something like 78% of air) shouldn't be affected by this And to have too little carbon we'd have to make A LOT of these so more realistically this can help slow down global warming I doubt we'd overshoot The more carbon fell the less these would become economical and fewer would be built. I think overshooting carbon removal is not a likely problem Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woolfsmck 2,763 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 5 minutes ago, Mardy said: Don’t worry. 40million trees ain't that much. Even with co2 capturing technologies, we won’t be able to affect the breathing air. After all the seas are the best co2 locks we have, capturing 70% of the co2. yeah .. sounds like a big number … but its really a microscopic percentage of the actual volume … you would need a millions of those plants to counter the current human global output … like a cat in a sil, I observe life, moving and still. My words give a clue,look inside to see whats true Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonWhiteGirl 1,039 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 This is an amazing idea but there are so many other factors that make it just ok. My problem with it is that it doesn't address the root of the problem, which is the amount of CO2 being pumped into the atmosphere. This might reduce those emissions but it doesn't act as a way to convert our current energy outputs into something more sustainable. It just allows for big polluting companies to continue their wasteful practices without having to change their way to something that will actually help the environment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Economy 52,844 Posted January 31, 2020 Author Share Posted January 31, 2020 21 minutes ago, Woolfsmck said: yeah .. sounds like a big number … but its really a microscopic percentage of the actual volume … you would need a millions of those plants to counter the current human global output … Aaaak not millions then we would overshoot carbon removal like @AlexanderMagno said Unless when u said millions u just meant as a figure of speech for lotza plants then nevermindsies Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woolfsmck 2,763 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 1 minute ago, Economy said: Aaaak not millions then we would overshoot carbon removal like @AlexanderMagno said Unless when u said millions u just meant as a figure of speech for lotza plants then nevermindsies okay .. my math could be hyperbolic .. but what is the profit return .. capturing carbon should help offset emissions .. but balancing it to the output by manufacturing would need to balance the budget to make it viable on a large scale … I get that removing carbon will help stave off global warming , and save money that way too .. but a net zero outcome won't be attractive … like a cat in a sil, I observe life, moving and still. My words give a clue,look inside to see whats true Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.99c40bc2a10ded8236a48b4fe15c6be8.jpg)
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.