> Not a surprise, since co2 is an oxide, and therefore very stable in the athmosphere. It would take a huge amount of energy to remove it,
There is an exothermic reaction that removes CO2 from the atmosphere, the formation of carbonates from weathering of silicate rocks. As this is naturally very slow, there is currently ongoing research into multiple different ways to speed it up.
>The extracted CO2 will then be piped from the collector boxes to a nearby processing facility, where it will be mixed with water and diverted to a deep underground well.
And there it will rest. Underground. Forever, presumably. The carbon dioxide captured from the Icelandic air will react with basalt rocks and begin a process of mineralization that takes several years, but it will never function as a heat-trapping atmospheric gas again.
The only use is in removing it from the atmosphere.
> You capture it at great cost and then you create a fuel. Which you then burn and dump in the atmosphere.
But if the need for carbon based fuels is not able to be eliminated, this is the next best thing. It is better than digging more of it out of the ground, and then burn and dump it into the air!
> if we consume the fuel byproduct, presumably we just end up with co2 in the atmosphere?
The process would still be great news if true, as it could be a carbon-neutral source of hydrocarbon fuel for applications that are hard to electrify, like aviation.
...into CO2
reply