215
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] A_A@lemmy.world 31 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Making sodium formate (HCOONa), using electrochemistry :
CO~2~ + H~2~ =>> formic acid
H~2~O =>> H~2~ + 1/2O~2~
NaCl + H~2~O =>> NaOH + 1/2H~2~ + 1/2Cl~2~
formic acid + NaOH =>> sodium formate

I guess they must use something similar to this, probably shortening some steps and using efficient solvent at the right temperature and pressure and with the right electrocatalist.

Well, I still prefer photosynthesis which produces sugar (and +). Plants are self replicating, use free solar energy, captues CO~2~ straight from the air and all this probably at a tiny fraction of the cost.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 14 points 11 months ago

I prefer algae... much more space in the ocean...

[-] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 21 points 11 months ago

My understanding is that pumping algae into the ocean is actually a really bad idea. In a barren pond or abandoned quarry? Sure, great place for it. However, iirc, if the algae blooms it'll suck a lot of oxygen out of the water and I think puts CO2 back into the water (can't remember if it just sucks up oxygen, or if it does both). That can cause marine life to suffocate and result in mass die-offs.

[-] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

I never understood that- isn't algae a plant therfore o2 producer?

It dies off and sucks oxygen, but its a balance

[-] themurphy@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

The problem is that if algae dies, it's most likely die at the same time making a sudden and great O2 shortage making animals die, which creates the same process.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Plants have a cycle, where sometimes they absorb more CO2 and sometimes they give off more. It’s not permanent storage.

With fossil fuels, we are taking CO2 that gas been sequestered for hundreds of millions of years, and injecting it either directly into the atmosphere, or into plant lifecycle where it is temporarily stored until it goes into the atmosphere. Plants help but are too temporary a solution

[-] A_A@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

You are mostly right, but what I meant (sorry I was not explicit) was this :
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bog

[-] wikibot@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Here's the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment:

A bog or bogland is a wetland that accumulates peat as a deposit of dead plant materials – often mosses, typically sphagnum moss. It is one of the four main types of wetlands. Other names for bogs include mire, mosses, quagmire, and muskeg; alkaline mires are called fens. A baygall is another type of bog found in the forest of the Gulf Coast states in the United States. They are often covered in heath or heather shrubs rooted in the sphagnum moss and peat. The gradual accumulation of decayed plant material in a bog functions as a carbon sink.Bogs occur where the water at the ground surface is acidic and low in nutrients. A bog usually is found at a freshwater soft spongy ground that is made up of decayed plant matter which is known as peat. They are generally found in cooler northern climates and are formed in poorly draining lake basins. In contrast to fens, they derive most of their water from precipitation rather than mineral-rich ground or surface water. Water flowing out of bogs has a characteristic brown colour, which comes from dissolved peat tannins. In general, the low fertility and cool climate result in relatively slow plant growth, but decay is even slower due to low oxygen levels in saturated bog soils. Hence, peat accumulates. Large areas of the landscape can be covered many meters deep in peat.Bogs have distinctive assemblages of animal, fungal, and plant species, and are of high importance for biodiversity, particularly in landscapes that are otherwise settled and farmed.

^article^ ^|^ ^about^

[-] Chocrates@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Yeah, woody perrenials lock up CO2 for centuries and we have a lot of abandoned mines and whatever holes are leftover from oil drilling that we could theoretically bury plant material in.

Still whatever we do would need to be on unprecedented scales and the World is just not going to do that. At least not until the effects are so acute that it is too late.

[-] A_A@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Yes, and this ("World is just not going to do that") is very bad since things will get worse and many people may die (sooner than they would have) in the next 50, 100 years.
if you look at very long time scale, thousand years and more, things will balance up. (...?) But we don't really know : there might be big volcanoes or completely new technologies like Geo engineering. Of course the future is (mostly) unknown.

[-] Chocrates@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Yeah, the earth will be just fine. Humans and human civilization are what is at stake.

this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2023
215 points (97.4% liked)

Technology

59414 readers
1139 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS