Carbon Engineering Ltd.
Carbon Engineering Ltd.
  • Видео 16
  • Просмотров 1 078 511
Understanding Permanent Carbon Removal | Carbon Engineering
Learn about permanent carbon removal through Direct Air Capture, and the role it can play in helping to achieve or exceed net zero targets. Visit hubs.li/Q01fhc-50 to learn more and to connect with Carbon Engineering's regional partners.
Carbon Engineering (CE) is a climate solutions company. CE is a leading developer of Direct Air Capture (DAC) technology that captures carbon dioxide (CO2) directly out of the atmosphere so it can be permanently stored deep underground or used to produce low carbon intensity fuel or products.
Connect With Us:
Twitter: CarbonEngineer
Facebook: carbonengineeringltd
Instagram: carbonengineer
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/co...
Просмотров: 9 606

Видео

Direct Air Capture Innovation Centre in Squamish, B.C. | Carbon Engineering
Просмотров 10 тыс.2 года назад
Video credit: 1PointFive www.1pointfive.com/ Watch this video from our US development partner, 1PointFive, exploring Carbon Engineering's Innovation Centre in Squamish, B.C. This facility is CE’s permanent R&D and advanced development platform for ongoing technology development and testing.
The Importance of Direct Air Capture in Addressing Climate Change | Carbon Engineering
Просмотров 6 тыс.2 года назад
Join Carbon Engineering’s VP and Head of Business Development, Lori Guetre, as she walks through what it would mean to achieve net zero - including what time we have left in our carbon budget and the tools available today to help get the job done. Plus, the potential to go beyond net zero - to begin to draw down the excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Join us for a look at carbon and clima...
Producing Sustainable Aviation Fuel From Air | Carbon Engineering
Просмотров 13 тыс.3 года назад
Carbon Engineering is proud to be a finalist in Natural Resources Canada's Sky's the Limit Challenge. Watch the above to learn how we produced sustainable aviation fuel from air at our facility in Squamish, British Columbia. Learn more about the Sky's the Limit Challenge here: ruclips.net/video/OCpmnqm7II8/видео.html About Carbon Engineering Founded in 2009, Carbon Engineering (CE) is a Canadia...
Direct Air Capture of CO2 from the Atmosphere | Carbon Engineering
Просмотров 20 тыс.3 года назад
Get in touch with Carbon Engineering: hubs.li/H0WNT4v0 About Carbon Engineering Founded in 2009, Carbon Engineering (CE) is a Canadian-based clean energy company. CE is focused on the global deployment of megaton-scale Direct Air Capture (DAC) technology that captures carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the atmosphere so it can be permanently stored deep underground or used to produce clean, affordable...
Innovation Centre Progress | Carbon Engineering
Просмотров 2,2 тыс.3 года назад
Construction of Carbon Engineering’s Innovation Centre in Squamish, B.C., has moved along quickly this spring! This centre will be Carbon Engineering’s permanent headquarters and advanced development facility where the team will optimize and improve our technologies. For more info and images of the construction progress, visit carbonengineering.com/news-updates/ More About Carbon Engineering We...
What energy is used to power CE's Direct Air Capture technology? | Carbon Engineering FAQs
Просмотров 1,7 тыс.3 года назад
At Carbon Engineering, we often hear from people interested in learning more about our technology and how it can help in the fight against climate change. We are launching a new video series to answer our most frequently asked questions. Discover the answers to more FAQ's here: carbonengineering.com/frequently-asked-questions/ More About Carbon Engineering: We're working to restore our climate ...
Why do we need to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere? | Carbon Engineering FAQs
Просмотров 5 тыс.3 года назад
At Carbon Engineering, we often hear from people interested in learning more about our technology and how it can help in the fight against climate change. We are launching a new video series to answer our most frequently asked questions. Discover the answers to more FAQ's here: carbonengineering.com/frequently-asked-questions/ More About Carbon Engineering: We're working to restore our climate ...
Carbon Engineering Innovation Centre Progress
Просмотров 2,3 тыс.3 года назад
Construction of Carbon Engineering’s Innovation Centre in Squamish, B.C., has progressed swiftly throughout winter. This centre will be Carbon Engineering’s permanent headquarters and advanced development facility where the team will optimize and improve our technologies. For more info and images of the construction progress, head here: bit.ly/2ZHVM5j More About Carbon Engineering We're working...
Direct Air Capture as Part of a Net Zero Future | Carbon Engineering
Просмотров 1,9 тыс.3 года назад
At Carbon Engineering, we’re firm believers that a net-zero future is possible. To get there, the global community will need to work together, and use all of the innovative tools we have to both reduce the world’s carbon emissions, and also remove existing carbon emissions from our atmosphere. Learn about Carbon Engineering’s contribution to a net zero future and our mission to make a material ...
Carbon Engineering: Sky's the Limit Mid-Project Update
Просмотров 12 тыс.4 года назад
Carbon Engineering is proud to be a finalist in Natural Resources Canada's Sky's the Limit Challenge. At this mid point in the challenge, we have made significant progress in developing a sustainable aviation fuel. Watch the above to learn the steps we've taken so far at our pilot facility in Squamish, British Columbia, as well as what's next. Learn more about the Sky's the Limit Challenge here...
Carbon Engineering | Direct Air Capture Technology
Просмотров 56 тыс.5 лет назад
Carbon Engineering's Direct Air Capture tech removes CO2 from the atmosphere. More: carbonengineering.com/ Carbon Engineering's Direct Air Capture technology removes carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere. Unlike capturing emissions from industrial flue stacks, our technology captures carbon dioxide (CO2) - the primary greenhouse gas responsible for climate change - directly out of the air...
Carbon Engineering's Direct Air Capture Facility | Squamish
Просмотров 20 тыс.6 лет назад
Explore Carbon Engineering's Direct Air Capture pilot facility in Squamish, British Columbia. Learn more: carbonengineering.com/ Founded in 2009, Carbon Engineering Ltd. (CE) is a Canadian-based clean energy company. CE is leading the commercialization of groundbreaking Direct Air Capture technology that captures carbon dioxide (CO2) directly from the atmosphere so it can be permanently stored ...
How to turn carbon dioxide into fuel | Carbon Engineering
Просмотров 84 тыс.6 лет назад
Learn about Carbon Engineering's AIR TO FUELS process, which produces clean transportation fuels. More: carbonengineering.com/ The atmospheric CO2 delivered by our Direct Air Capture process can be used to produce clean transportation fuels. We call this the AIR TO FUELS process. CE’s AIR TO FUELS process starts by using renewable electricity to split hydrogen from water, then combines the hydr...
Carbon Engineering | Pilot Plant Construction
Просмотров 19 тыс.9 лет назад
A drone's-eye view of construction progress at Carbon Engineering's Direct Air Capture demo plant. More: carbonengineering.com/ This plant will capture CO2 directly from the atmosphere in 2015, and will demonstrate Carbon Engineering's complete technology for the first time. Twitter: CarbonEngineer Facebook: carbonengineeringltd/ Instagram: carbonengineer...
Carbon Engineering | Direct Air Capture of CO2
Просмотров 815 тыс.12 лет назад
Carbon Engineering | Direct Air Capture of CO2

Комментарии

  • @douglasengle2704
    @douglasengle2704 2 месяца назад

    It's scientifically impossible for greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. All the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth is absorbed in earth's greenhouse effect within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor. This video has the United Nations Climate Change disclaimer. Global warming was officially stated at 1.1°C in 1991 and 1.06°C in 2022. There is no mechanism that would allow greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. The back of the United Nation's IPCC science report states it took its greenhouse gas samples at 20,000 meters altitude where it is common high school level knowledge there is no greenhouse radiant energy. This is typical practice for deceptive marketing to state legal data transparency protecting the perpetrators from fraud prosecution. The IPCC has been transparent with its data acknowledging it is not dealing with active greenhouse gases. Earth's greenhouse effect is frequently used as a primary example to high school students of a system always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor absorbing all the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth with greenhouse gases within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is all around us everyday and can't have its overall effect changed. There is no further greenhouse radiant energy to interact with greenhouse gases. At 1% average tropospheric water vapor over 99% of earth’s greenhouse effect is from water vapor. Water vapor would hold earth's greenhouse effect in saturation if it were the only greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Arctic warming is taking place with the proving mechanism being warm Atlantic Ocean waters migrating deeper and more frequently into the Arctic Ocean warming it and the region. That warmer water is causing a few weeks less of reflective snow and ice coverage resulting in more solar heat gain to the Arctic region surface. Atmospheric CO2 levels of 1200 ppm about three times what they are today would greatly invigorate C3 plants the majority of plant life on earth greatly greening the planet. 0.4% of the atmosphere is CO2 and on average 1% is H20 water vapor. (1% H20)/(0.4% CO2) = 25. Water vapor is 25 times more present in the atmosphere on average than CO2. Water vapor has an CO2e of 18, 18 X 25 = 450 CO2e total for water vapor to 1 CO2e for CO2. The Earth’s oceans have 3-1/2 million sea floor volcanic vents warming the water and changing it’s chemistry that have not been systematically accounted for.

  • @douglasengle2704
    @douglasengle2704 2 месяца назад

    It's scientifically impossible for greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. All the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth is absorbed in earth's greenhouse effect within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor. This video has the United Nations Climate Change disclaimer. Global warming was officially stated at 1.1°C in 1991 and 1.06°C in 2022. There is no mechanism that would allow greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. The back of the United Nation's IPCC science report states it took its greenhouse gas samples at 20,000 meters altitude where it is common high school level knowledge there is no greenhouse radiant energy. This is typical practice for deceptive marketing to state legal data transparency protecting the perpetrators from fraud prosecution. The IPCC has been transparent with its data acknowledging it is not dealing with active greenhouse gases. Earth's greenhouse effect is frequently used as a primary example to high school students of a system always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor absorbing all the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth with greenhouse gases within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is all around us everyday and can't have its overall effect changed. There is no further greenhouse radiant energy to interact with greenhouse gases. At 1% average tropospheric water vapor over 99% of earth’s greenhouse effect is from water vapor. Water vapor would hold earth's greenhouse effect in saturation if it were the only greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Arctic warming is taking place with the proving mechanism being warm Atlantic Ocean waters migrating deeper and more frequently into the Arctic Ocean warming it and the region. That warmer water is causing a few weeks less of reflective snow and ice coverage resulting in more solar heat gain to the Arctic region surface. Atmospheric CO2 levels of 1200 ppm about three times what they are today would greatly invigorate C3 plants the majority of plant life on earth greatly greening the planet. 0.4% of the atmosphere is CO2 and on average 1% is H20 water vapor. (1% H20)/(0.4% CO2) = 25. Water vapor is 25 times more present in the atmosphere on average than CO2. Water vapor has an CO2e of 18, 18 X 25 = 450 CO2e total for water vapor to 1 CO2e for CO2. The Earth’s oceans have 3-1/2 million sea floor volcanic vents warming the water and changing it’s chemistry that have not been systematically accounted for.

  • @douglasengle2704
    @douglasengle2704 2 месяца назад

    It's scientifically impossible for greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. All the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth is absorbed in earth's greenhouse effect within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor. This video has the United Nations Climate Change disclaimer. Global warming was officially stated at 1.1°C in 1991 and 1.06°C in 2022. There is no mechanism that would allow greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. The back of the United Nation's IPCC science report states it took its greenhouse gas samples at 20,000 meters altitude where it is common high school level knowledge there is no greenhouse radiant energy. This is typical practice for deceptive marketing to state legal data transparency protecting the perpetrators from fraud prosecution. The IPCC has been transparent with its data acknowledging it is not dealing with active greenhouse gases. Earth's greenhouse effect is frequently used as a primary example to high school students of a system always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor absorbing all the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth with greenhouse gases within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is all around us everyday and can't have its overall effect changed. There is no further greenhouse radiant energy to interact with greenhouse gases. At 1% average tropospheric water vapor over 99% of earth’s greenhouse effect is from water vapor. Water vapor would hold earth's greenhouse effect in saturation if it were the only greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Arctic warming is taking place with the proving mechanism being warm Atlantic Ocean waters migrating deeper and more frequently into the Arctic Ocean warming it and the region. That warmer water is causing a few weeks less of reflective snow and ice coverage resulting in more solar heat gain to the Arctic region surface. Atmospheric CO2 levels of 1200 ppm about three times what they are today would greatly invigorate C3 plants the majority of plant life on earth greatly greening the planet. 0.4% of the atmosphere is CO2 and on average 1% is H20 water vapor. (1% H20)/(0.4% CO2) = 25. Water vapor is 25 times more present in the atmosphere on average than CO2. Water vapor has an CO2e of 18, 18 X 25 = 450 CO2e total for water vapor to 1 CO2e for CO2. The Earth’s oceans have 3-1/2 million sea floor volcanic vents warming the water and changing it’s chemistry that have not been systematically accounted for.

  • @douglasengle2704
    @douglasengle2704 2 месяца назад

    It's scientifically impossible for greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. All the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth is absorbed in earth's greenhouse effect within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor. This video has the United Nations Climate Change disclaimer. Global warming was officially stated at 1.1°C in 1991 and 1.06°C in 2022. There is no mechanism that would allow greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. The back of the United Nation's IPCC science report states it took its greenhouse gas samples at 20,000 meters altitude where it is common high school level knowledge there is no greenhouse radiant energy. This is typical practice for deceptive marketing to state legal data transparency protecting the perpetrators from fraud prosecution. The IPCC has been transparent with its data acknowledging it is not dealing with active greenhouse gases. Earth's greenhouse effect is frequently used as a primary example to high school students of a system always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor absorbing all the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth with greenhouse gases within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is all around us everyday and can't have its overall effect changed. There is no further greenhouse radiant energy to interact with greenhouse gases. At 1% average tropospheric water vapor over 99% of earth’s greenhouse effect is from water vapor. Water vapor would hold earth's greenhouse effect in saturation if it were the only greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Arctic warming is taking place with the proving mechanism being warm Atlantic Ocean waters migrating deeper and more frequently into the Arctic Ocean warming it and the region. That warmer water is causing a few weeks less of reflective snow and ice coverage resulting in more solar heat gain to the Arctic region surface. Atmospheric CO2 levels of 1200 ppm about three times what they are today would greatly invigorate C3 plants the majority of plant life on earth greatly greening the planet. 0.4% of the atmosphere is CO2 and on average 1% is H20 water vapor. (1% H20)/(0.4% CO2) = 25. Water vapor is 25 times more present in the atmosphere on average than CO2. Water vapor has an CO2e of 18, 18 X 25 = 450 CO2e total for water vapor to 1 CO2e for CO2. The Earth’s oceans have 3-1/2 million sea floor volcanic vents warming the water and changing it’s chemistry that have not been systematically accounted for.

  • @douglasengle2704
    @douglasengle2704 2 месяца назад

    It's scientifically impossible for greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. All the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth is absorbed in earth's greenhouse effect within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor. This video has the United Nations Climate Change disclaimer. Global warming was officially stated at 1.1°C in 1991 and 1.06°C in 2022. There is no mechanism that would allow greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. The back of the United Nation's IPCC science report states it took its greenhouse gas samples at 20,000 meters altitude where it is common high school level knowledge there is no greenhouse radiant energy. This is typical practice for deceptive marketing to state legal data transparency protecting the perpetrators from fraud prosecution. The IPCC has been transparent with its data acknowledging it is not dealing with active greenhouse gases. Earth's greenhouse effect is frequently used as a primary example to high school students of a system always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor absorbing all the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth with greenhouse gases within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is all around us everyday and can't have its overall effect changed. There is no further greenhouse radiant energy to interact with greenhouse gases. At 1% average tropospheric water vapor over 99% of earth’s greenhouse effect is from water vapor. Water vapor would hold earth's greenhouse effect in saturation if it were the only greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Arctic warming is taking place with the proving mechanism being warm Atlantic Ocean waters migrating deeper and more frequently into the Arctic Ocean warming it and the region. That warmer water is causing a few weeks less of reflective snow and ice coverage resulting in more solar heat gain to the Arctic region surface. Atmospheric CO2 levels of 1200 ppm about three times what they are today would greatly invigorate C3 plants the majority of plant life on earth greatly greening the planet. 0.4% of the atmosphere is CO2 and on average 1% is H20 water vapor. (1% H20)/(0.4% CO2) = 25. Water vapor is 25 times more present in the atmosphere on average than CO2. Water vapor has an CO2e of 18, 18 X 25 = 450 CO2e total for water vapor to 1 CO2e for CO2. The Earth’s oceans have 3-1/2 million sea floor volcanic vents warming the water and changing it’s chemistry that have not been systematically accounted for.

  • @douglasengle2704
    @douglasengle2704 2 месяца назад

    It's scientifically impossible for greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. All the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth is absorbed in earth's greenhouse effect within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor. This video has the United Nations Climate Change disclaimer. Global warming was officially stated at 1.1°C in 1991 and 1.06°C in 2022. There is no mechanism that would allow greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. The back of the United Nation's IPCC science report states it took its greenhouse gas samples at 20,000 meters altitude where it is common high school level knowledge there is no greenhouse radiant energy. This is typical practice for deceptive marketing to state legal data transparency protecting the perpetrators from fraud prosecution. The IPCC has been transparent with its data acknowledging it is not dealing with active greenhouse gases. Earth's greenhouse effect is frequently used as a primary example to high school students of a system always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor absorbing all the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth with greenhouse gases within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is all around us everyday and can't have its overall effect changed. There is no further greenhouse radiant energy to interact with greenhouse gases. At 1% average tropospheric water vapor over 99% of earth’s greenhouse effect is from water vapor. Water vapor would hold earth's greenhouse effect in saturation if it were the only greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Arctic warming is taking place with the proving mechanism being warm Atlantic Ocean waters migrating deeper and more frequently into the Arctic Ocean warming it and the region. That warmer water is causing a few weeks less of reflective snow and ice coverage resulting in more solar heat gain to the Arctic region surface. Atmospheric CO2 levels of 1200 ppm about three times what they are today would greatly invigorate C3 plants the majority of plant life on earth greatly greening the planet. 0.4% of the atmosphere is CO2 and on average 1% is H20 water vapor. (1% H20)/(0.4% CO2) = 25. Water vapor is 25 times more present in the atmosphere on average than CO2. Water vapor has an CO2e of 18, 18 X 25 = 450 CO2e total for water vapor to 1 CO2e for CO2. The Earth’s oceans have 3-1/2 million sea floor volcanic vents warming the water and changing it’s chemistry that have not been systematically accounted for.

  • @douglasengle2704
    @douglasengle2704 2 месяца назад

    It's scientifically impossible for greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. All the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth is absorbed in earth's greenhouse effect within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor. This video has the United Nations Climate Change disclaimer. Global warming was officially stated at 1.1°C in 1991 and 1.06°C in 2022. There is no mechanism that would allow greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. The back of the United Nation's IPCC science report states it took its greenhouse gas samples at 20,000 meters altitude where it is common high school level knowledge there is no greenhouse radiant energy. This is typical practice for deceptive marketing to state legal data transparency protecting the perpetrators from fraud prosecution. The IPCC has been transparent with its data acknowledging it is not dealing with active greenhouse gases. Earth's greenhouse effect is frequently used as a primary example to high school students of a system always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor absorbing all the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth with greenhouse gases within 20 meters of the radiating surface that is all around us everyday and can't have its overall effect changed. There is no further greenhouse radiant energy to interact with greenhouse gases. At 1% average tropospheric water vapor over 99% of earth’s greenhouse effect is from water vapor. Water vapor would hold earth's greenhouse effect in saturation if it were the only greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Arctic warming is taking place with the proving mechanism being warm Atlantic Ocean waters migrating deeper and more frequently into the Arctic Ocean warming it and the region. That warmer water is causing a few weeks less of reflective snow and ice coverage resulting in more solar heat gain to the Arctic region surface. Atmospheric CO2 levels of 1200 ppm about three times what they are today would greatly invigorate C3 plants the majority of plant life on earth greatly greening the planet. 0.4% of the atmosphere is CO2 and on average 1% is H20 water vapor. (1% H20)/(0.4% CO2) = 25. Water vapor is 25 times more present in the atmosphere on average than CO2. Water vapor has an CO2e of 18, 18 X 25 = 450 CO2e total for water vapor to 1 CO2e for CO2. The Earth’s oceans have 3-1/2 million sea floor volcanic vents warming the water and changing it’s chemistry that have not been systematically accounted for.

  • @vincentleone1833
    @vincentleone1833 4 месяца назад

    DONT STORE IT PERMANENTLY!!!! CARBON DIOXIDE ISNT INTRINSICALLY A PROBLEM, THE UNCONTROLLED RELEASE OF IT INTO THE ATMOSPHERE IS... YOU HAVE TO MAKE IT A CYCLE 1 - 1 = 0 BUT 1,000,000 - 1,000,000 = 0 TOO... DO NOT PUMP CARBON DIOXIDE INTO THE GROUND, FOOD IS MADE OF CARBON, WE NEED CARBON FOR INCREASED GLOBAL POPULATION... USE IT TO MAKE SYNTHETIC FUEL AND STORE RENEWABLE ENERGIES IN THE WORLDS BEST BATTERY,...OIL!!!

  • @honderdzeventien
    @honderdzeventien 5 месяцев назад

    This really _is_ the way to go forward. But I would try and take it to the public too; if _I_ pay you $300.- will you capture a ton of carbon out of the atmosphere for _me?_ Like crowdsourcing carbon capture facilities. I am _sure_ people will invest. So if you keep it transparent from the start, you show which parts of the construction facility were paid for with that donation

  • @jonathonrossebo1783
    @jonathonrossebo1783 8 месяцев назад

    This technology has my support.

  • @jonathonrossebo1783
    @jonathonrossebo1783 8 месяцев назад

    I like the sound of this concept. This makes the most sense for renewable energy. If this becomes a large scale operation there's no need to ban internal combustion engines, like what California and Washington state are trying to do. This is a very awesome idea.

  • @hankgorman2722
    @hankgorman2722 11 месяцев назад

    lies!! big money grab. don't believe this .

  • @raymonddick8885
    @raymonddick8885 Год назад

    ... and when there is no CO2, the plants will die!!

  • @whatitdo6287
    @whatitdo6287 Год назад

    Could you use a waste to energy setup using biofuel generators that not only removes CO2 from the atmosphere but also mitigates landfill waste? Cryptocurrency mining could also be included to supplement operational costs.

  • @lauraymond4290
    @lauraymond4290 Год назад

    What is the business model? How does it earn money

  • @DJRS2178
    @DJRS2178 Год назад

    What a scam and waste of money. All plants and trees use co2 for growing and withstanding high temperatures. Climate agenda scam.

  • @parkosterwich7274
    @parkosterwich7274 Год назад

    Corporate greed at its finest. Profit over people

  • @parkosterwich7274
    @parkosterwich7274 Год назад

    You have no right to mess up the atmosphere then when things get worse blame climate to line your pockets again on a cycle. Something needs to be done with you idiots

  • @jonwatte4293
    @jonwatte4293 Год назад

    The laws of thermodynamics make it more efficient to use the electricity to offset current carbon power plants, than to good through capture. Plus you don't have to build a plant to do that. As long as there are fossil plants in operation, use the electricity to not run those plants, rather than building capture plants. Once we're all renewable, capture can get us too the next step.

  • @ElSantoLuchador
    @ElSantoLuchador Год назад

    Sure, but finding places to store all that CO2 is nothing less than problematic. It's not like it just goes away. You have to put it somewhere and hold it there for a very, very long time.

  • @ColtonRDean
    @ColtonRDean Год назад

    How many kilowatts of electricity is needed to pull one ton of CO2 out of the atmosphere?

    • @ElSantoLuchador
      @ElSantoLuchador Год назад

      The rule of thumb I came across is 1200 kWh per ton of C02. Of course there are a million variables, including the possibility of more efficient CCS going forward. Some of the fossil fuel generators can also use otherwise wasted energy through secondary means (thermal, for example) to power their own cleanup.

  • @Abdullah-lr2qd
    @Abdullah-lr2qd Год назад

    BANGLADESH AND WORLDWIDE NEED THIS TECHNOLOGY

  • @CentralParkish
    @CentralParkish Год назад

    expectation to work with Tesla Megapack for the power saving

  • @ClassScie
    @ClassScie Год назад

    Cost of one plant ? Plant size equal to 50M trees

  • @stefan-stocksmadesimple5241
    @stefan-stocksmadesimple5241 Год назад

    Green transition ain't green at all... It's all about money that power 🤭🤭

  • @jamesa7506
    @jamesa7506 Год назад

    Pretty interesting concept.

  • @qtipjoint
    @qtipjoint Год назад

    take away the very thing everything on earth needs trying to kill us all over time like spaceballs movie we will have air in a can

  • @mgwgeneral6467
    @mgwgeneral6467 Год назад

    See CRUDE OIL IS. NOT FOSSIL FUEL! It is naturally created deep down within the earth! It has nothing to do with dinosaurs! It just fit the definition of "fossil fuels "

  • @mdrafiqul3358
    @mdrafiqul3358 Год назад

    😀😀😀

  • @NickyMitchell85
    @NickyMitchell85 Год назад

    How can we be sure ☑️ that Carbon Capture and Storage is a reliable climate solution? So many websites say it’s not a climate solution but others say it is and others are so-so? I’m losing hope and I’m desperate. My soul and green heart 💚 is worn out and wearied by human-induced climate change. Please 🙏 let me know your thoughts 💭.

  • @hafizuddinmohdlowhim8426
    @hafizuddinmohdlowhim8426 Год назад

    Why do you think it is scalable? You will need more CO2 in order to produce more SAF. We want to reduce CO2 and not otherwise. Therefore this is not scalable because aviation industry is always growing.

  • @Josh-sm3hg
    @Josh-sm3hg Год назад

    Congratulations, you made 2 oz of jet fuel. Now it needs to be scalable. The US alone consumed 18.27 billion gallons of jet fuel in 2019. Source: US DOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics.

  • @alexantonov110
    @alexantonov110 Год назад

    Amount of CO2 produced daily is 100 MT (million tons) A large gas cylinder can take about 50 kg of pressurized CO2. We need two billion of cylinders. Each cylinder costs at least $100. Add the cost of stripping each ton CO2 from the air (CDR process) So we are in the range of trillion dollars to be paid daily for this funny idea. Trillion dollars DAILY !

  • @mathodalubaluba4110
    @mathodalubaluba4110 Год назад

    Fungi like mushrooms need carbon, u have carbon.

  • @richardcup66
    @richardcup66 Год назад

    Genius, and I hope it improves lives. I hope population goes up.

  • @rohanborse8100
    @rohanborse8100 Год назад

    I really do hope Carbon Engineering can work out this DAC problem on a large scale. I am just concerned with the fact that they are getting funding from Companies like BP and Chevron. Doesn't this incentivise them to dig up even more land to extract even more oil. Food for thought? Nevertheless I am happy they are getting some support at least

  • @antajhoque4182
    @antajhoque4182 2 года назад

    Sir, why we can't create the reagent that will create fuel from carbon dioxide yet???🤔🤔🤔

  • @JBMSTRIKER71
    @JBMSTRIKER71 2 года назад

    I dont know how serious this channel is but where can we buy stocks? Also what is the Octane and BTU ratings of your fuel?

  • @madjackmcmad6976
    @madjackmcmad6976 2 года назад

    It doesn't work.

  • @madjackmcmad6976
    @madjackmcmad6976 2 года назад

    It doesn't work.

    • @NickyMitchell85
      @NickyMitchell85 Год назад

      Stop 🛑 being so pessimistic. This does work and is a climate saviour.

  • @richardarnold5868
    @richardarnold5868 2 года назад

    Why is this Not being talked about World Wide ?

    • @some_doofus
      @some_doofus 2 года назад

      Exactly what I'm thinking. Startups like this usually have some fatal flaw that prevents real world application (just remember the hype around Solar Roadways), so I'm very skeptical about this technology until I see a thorough independent review of some kind. Though usually when world changing startups have some fatal flaw it doesn't take a whole lot of searching to find it, but, admittedly, I can't find any such flaws (so far) with Carbon Engineering, so while I'm still skeptical I am optimistic too. If this technology works as well as they say at scale it would basically make hydrocarbon fuels renewable energy. There would be no need to electrify the whole transport sector, and I'm almost more skeptical about 100% EVs than I am about this new technology because that plan is definitely not without its flaws.

  • @Haaknes
    @Haaknes 2 года назад

    I wonder what thunderf00t would say to this ...

  • @musicfordancingmeditationr6657
    @musicfordancingmeditationr6657 2 года назад

    ruclips.net/video/BV9l5aM7MdM/видео.html

  • @musicfordancingmeditationr6657
    @musicfordancingmeditationr6657 2 года назад

    Ctertap

  • @kimlibera663
    @kimlibera663 2 года назад

    I'm not an alarmist either b/c climate is 95% natural. However, this technology & a few others does appear to solve alot of the ongoing emissions. It makes no difference whether it's 75% of 90% it does take stuff out of the air & it can be recycled into new products (artificial limestone/provide co2 for the beverage industry). The important thing is it should allow existing electrical plants to stay afloat with their current fuel because that fuel is abundant & energy dense (efficiency). That is important be/c demand is always unsatiable & resources limited. This is more effective than intermittent wind & solar. I have nothing against wind & solar--they are nice supps but cannot meet the whole grid largely because of storage deficiencies. So how do you supply AC at night-very important? You must either have nat gas, coal, nuclear, or hydroelectric. We do not want a society where blackouts are normalized because this then becomes weaponized by politiicans who will turn it to extort votes & turn it off to punish people. You go with what's reliable.

  • @giancarlobocchi7112
    @giancarlobocchi7112 2 года назад

    It would be interesting to understand the energy efficiency of the whole system (DAC + GreenH2 + processing, Fischer-Tropsh etc).... tohave 100GJ of synthetic oil how many GJ (renewable) are needed?

    • @RDucet
      @RDucet 2 года назад

      This is my question too.

    • @some_doofus
      @some_doofus 2 года назад

      I'm assuming the energy required would be the most significant roadblock for this technology, and the idea of powering it with renewables like solar doesn't sound like it would work well considering the poor efficiency of solar. However if they paired these plants with small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) they would have all the clean energy they need relatively cheap. Just so happens that Canada is also one of the biggest players in the development of SMRs too at the moment. Could be a winning combination once both technologies are up and running.

  • @robertkowallek8453
    @robertkowallek8453 2 года назад

    What would happen if we removed more oxygen from the atmosphere instead of CO2? Animals breathe oxygen. Let's remove CO2 from the atmosphere. What do plants breathe?

    • @Linus_awoo
      @Linus_awoo 2 года назад

      Nature produces and uses co2, in Nature its usually balanced. But since we release co2 that was stored in the ground for milions of years and bc we dont have measures like nature to make the co2 into o2 again a good idea insted of shutting down our economy is to capture it

    • @yancgc5098
      @yancgc5098 Год назад

      Plants breathe in CO2 and oxygen, since they also do respiration and not just photosynthesis. There’s currently too much unnecessary CO2 in the atmosphere, which is why we need to remove that excess CO2 and reverse the amount that there is of it in the atmosphere. CO2 ppm shouldn’t be in the 400+ ppm range, it should be at most 300 ppm, that’s how all animal and plant life on Earth has adapted to for the past 2.5 million years. This rapid increase in CO2 ppm is bad for everyone.

  • @refink33
    @refink33 2 года назад

    good good. need more of ya'll working on this solution and funding

  • @jzugayar
    @jzugayar 2 года назад

    Hi I need to contact some one in head office for business opportunities in the GCC Kindly send me a name and mail and contact number

  • @NickyMitchell85
    @NickyMitchell85 2 года назад

    When shall we see more ‘direct air capture’ units coming online that are so powerful, just one ☝️ unit or set of units could capture 🆙 to 10 odd percent of our Carbon Dioxide emissions? What about Nitrous Oxide emissions? Is there gonna be a miracle machine that could suck Nitrous Oxide from our atmosphere?