5 ms·
I'm the author. Guilty as charged of not being an engineer. But did you see the paper I cited for this, https://sci-hub.st/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science
by Yvain 5y ago
I'm the author. Guilty as charged of not being an engineer. But did you see the paper I cited for this, https://sci-hub.st/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652619307772 https://sci-hub.st/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/art... ? I also think the fact that the price has come down by several times already and is still nowhere near an economy of scale suggests it can do so more in the future. I didn't mean Moore's Law as a literal "it will always go down by exactly the same amount every year"
- orwin 5y agoI didn't want to accuse you of something like "not being an engineer" (which is perfectly fin as long as you're not working in digital marketing :) ), i'm sorry, it was poorly worded. I've read the paper, it is very interesting, it does not talk about machine pumping carbon out of the atmosphere however (the figure appeared low, now i know why). But yeah, DAC might be a solution. I'll rather take the IEA rapport on this [0]. Removing CO2 from the atmosphere and removing carbon is not the same thing. You then need to either seal the CO2, or transform it ( in a power-to-gas station? ). Also their base case of 15% capex/year can go outside see if i'm there. [0] https://www.iea.org/reports/direct-air-capture https://www.iea.org/reports/direct-air-capture