This Company is Reversing Climate Change
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 05. 2024
- Head to actnow.climeworks.com/futurology to start removing CO₂ from the air today!
Climate change is the greatest challenge humanity has ever faced. And, while efforts are in place to reduce emissions and eventually reach carbon neutrality, we will be releasing billions of tons of carbon dioxide in the meantime. To help lower emissions and eventually bring them back to normal, we must also start removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Fortunately, there is technology that does exactly that. With its innovative technology, the company Climeworks has become the leader in direct air capture technology. By taking part in one of their monthly subscriptions, you can remove carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere and help in the fight against climate change.
Thank you to Climeworks for sponsoring this video! - Zábava
This tech captures 4k Tons of CO2 yearly while coal power plants can emits a few millions Tons of CO2 per year, closing one coal power plants is more effective than building a thousand more of those. Maybe they'll be useful when we get to 0 emissions but in the meantime any effort spent on this project seems like it could do a lot more if spent on changing electricity production.
There's still 240 coal power plants in the US alone, closing them would be like building a million of carbon capture plant.
Unless we keep investing in this technology and making it better. You're too short sighted.
@@itznitefox2845 what we need is to "keep investing" to swap from coal to nuclear power plants.
We just watched a 5 minute ad…..
An ad for a good cause.
@@Jamala_ Not necessarily, it could be all smoke and mirrors. There are companies like the Gateway Foundation that make proposals on mega-projects and seek to monetise them. Selling them as a "grand vision". Beyond investing in marketing (like this video) to attract more investment nothing ever comes of them but the activity is extremely profitable for those involved.
Goodwill is monetisable.
pretty much yeah lol
A doc uad
Average world wide carbon dioxide footprint (usa excluded) is 4 tons a year, if they remove with the current plant 4000 tons a year, its like 1000 people
The basil plant in my kitchen is helping combat climate change, just the effect is insignificant. The same for industrial carbon sequestration, it's negligible to the point of being a gimmick.
I mean all technology was a gimmick at some point. But the idea is that it will improve and become more efficient.
Also just want to point out, no, your basil plant is not capturing carbon. Once you eat it, or throw it out, it will decompose, and release that same carbon back into the atmosphere.
At the best they want to capture 1 GT of CO2 per year if i understand clearly, but we produce like 38 GT per year, wich mean they will capture 2.6% of the global earth production each year. Anyway to produce the electricity to capture the CO2 they will produce some CO2 so yeah i don't really know if its worth it.
@@quantumlife8426 Let's take your 1GT figure on face value. CO2 is around 400ppm. So to sequester 1GT you need to process 2500GT of atmosphere annually. Air has a density of 1.2kg per m^3. So, let's say 2b m^3 of air in a year. 31556952 seconds in a year so about 60m^3 of air per second has to go in, be sequestered and released. That's with perfect efficiency which is impossible obviously, so we'll say 150m^3 per second. So roughly St Paul's Cathedral of air every second.
I'm not saying it's not possible, but it would be the largest mega-project ever undertaken by humanity. How many hundreds of billions of seed money does this firm have?
@@davidmurphy563 I'm in agreement with you, but I'll leave the math to you.
If we take the EUs 2030 goal of a 55% reduction of 1990 co2 emmissions (22.75 billion tons annually, 2020 number is at 34.81 billion tons so that's working out well), and assume that 75% of carbon capture of that remaining 45% of co2 emissions is handled by other sources, we still need just over 71,000 of those "Mammoth" installations to capture the carbon. Taking their 2050 goal of removing 1 billion tons per year, they would need 27,700 of these installations. Their "scalability" isn't even half of what they would need in the best case scenario. It's going to be sad but funny when we have some executives and out of touch politicians touring one of these future plants, having freshly paved over a forest and constructed a new power plant in the region to power the things; and demonstrating it as a model of progress.
Plus, I'm assuming there is going to be a point at which the rocks they are pumping the co2 into are just going to be saturated with it, and wont accept any more. Guessing on when that might occur would impossible for me, but if its anywhere in the short term, the churn on building these installations might far in a way outpace its capture rate. It'd be extremely ironic.
sound like something very good at sucking government money 🤔
The important thing is that they'll get very, very rich trying...
@@MustadMarine that old saying rings true. Follow the money.
The fact is that it seems interesting on the paper but to works it need electricity and energy so it pollutes to remove pollution, a little strange, but why not if we manage to remove more CO2 pollution than is produced by operating these machines. The question is, what will the company do when there will be no more CO2 to remove from the atmosphere ?
They would do nothing. Plants die at 230 ppm, and people will start dying a lot sooner than that.
I wonder how much algae they could have grown and how much CO2 would have been removed from the atmosphere with the same investment money they raised
Trees and algae:
Bruh robots are makin my homies jobless fr fr
1:54 wait is this the same tech they use in submarines to get rid of co2?
It would take earth 10.000 years to remove the carbon we have put in the atmosphere since 1800. We are going to see the ocean rise 100 feet, like it was in the Pliocene Epoch, and Earth's average temperature increase by 2.5 C turning much of Europe and the USA into desert. As long as co2 remains above 400ppm this is baked in. Direct carbon capture is our only hope to reverse this inevitability.
Sounds like green ponzi scheme 😘
What is the Carbon footprint for their facility? For each ton of Carbon removed, how much energy was used? Do they use renewable energy to power any of the facilities? The amount of space these facilities take, how many trees could have been planted? How much Carbon could said trees remove? Did you actually "partner" with them? The video sounds more like they sponsored the video. I expected more out of you Futurology.
@Ayaan Agarwal I never made any such claims to any "facts". Merely requested more information on something that was put forth by the content creator. You can't put out a video fanboying over a contraption that may do harm more than good without any context and expect people to take it at face value.
The flaws of planting trees don't make sense. People know that if you just leave the forest alone I'll be fine right? It's been like this for like aeons.
mhm very nice. now let's see its energy consumption
Or how big the carbon footprint is to build this facility. They have to import a lot of building materials to build something like this in Iceland. Construction materials also have a huge carbon footprint.
Yeah this sounds like a ponzi scheme.
Nice video
How will this affect trees, I understand we need to reduce our emissions...., Without trees, humans are screwed and yes trees need carbon etc
It will not affect trees at al, due to 2 main reasons:
- the scale is currently so small that it basically does nothing yet, although it may be scaled up massively in the future.
- the project focusses on lowering the excess carbon in the air, if this project somehow manages to be effective, it will not remove all the carbon in the air, just the excess part responsible for climate change.
Furthermore, it is also not 100% that more carbon in the air means that trees will be better carbon sinks. They will grow faster (till a carbon threshold is reached), but also die more easily.
😊👍
*More like this video is sponsored by the World Economic Forum*
Flawed plan here... because the removed carbon can then be converted to a zero emission fuel.
This unsung hero deserves more recognition!
Amazing 🤩 didn’t know the world is that simple and just CO2 is the problem of everything.
I know for an long time our plant is going to die THERE IS NO PLANET EARTH 2!!!
Hopium
Fakest news I have ever heard
What do you mean? The company is real. And this description is more or less accurate.
@@CassieAngelica Probably the fact that the amount of carbon captured each year by this company is so small that it is negligible.
If we combine all carbon capture tech we capture about 40 million metric tonnes of carbon per year.
To compare this, in 2020 we emitted 34.81 billion metric tons. And that ignores indirect emissions from melted polar ice etc. Furthermore the excess carbon emitted during previous years is also still in the atmosphere.
Tech like this needs to be upscaled at least hundredfold to contribute anything. That is not to say it is not possible, but it is not something that is making an impact right now when we need it.
Another argument can also be made that money spent on carbon capture tech is money not spend on replacing fossil fuels with green alternatives. Alternatives that carbon capture tech, do have a noticeable effect on the amount of emitted carbon. Although I do not fully support this argument myself as combating climate change is not a zero sum game. Projects like this also increase awareness and open up new routes and new funding for combating climate change.
That Hans dude could also be a climate change denying whack job of course.
@@vinnie2356 fair enough, I think all options should be looked into. The ones that are the most realistic as of today are the ones we should start with. (Surprised Pickachu Face). But carbon capture to me makes no sense if you just store it underground, much like the nuclear waste issue. There are a lot of patents in this field just waiting to happen, also, this company and its initiative is over 5 years old, and they don’t seem to have made much progress.
@@vinnie2356 well u have to start somewhere, for example Solar panels where insignificant many years ago, but now because they are mass implemented they are cost effective and produce a lot of electricity, so we can put the same argument for the carbon capture programs it’s just beginning and in a decade or two they will be ONE of MANY important factors in combat of climate change, we don’t need to just stop pumping carbon ( which is super super important too that’s why we are investing in renewable energy ) but the fact is that there is already to much carbon in the air so some of it needs to be captured in order to save planet
@@pj5793 well said
More
The Paris agreement does nothing
....I thought of gigantic machines like this years ago...If scale is the issue, they need huge machines.....They probably should work on, gigantic 3,4,5,etc printers and robots, that can use incredible WiFi technologies....These kinds of machines, can continue to get bigger and bigger....Eventually, planets could be printed, and populated, with all kinds of great histories documented, in the ever lasting expanding universe or universes......So when humans conquer aging for every creature eventually, all will be aware of every thing, that ever happened, to everything... Yet, that may get boring at times, when time and mater are conquered for all......So other great goals will be made....
This is what we need to show and tell congress but with amps to get the message across and anyone who thinks this is a waste of time needs to be kicked out and replaced with someone who understands climate change. Hopfully soon we hear more about the transportation industry and what they are doing for the car of the future.
air needs to have some carbon as it's the thing what plants need. If u remove all that's not good :D
Oh boy this company is reversing fake thing. We are living through the biggest era of snake oil salesmen in the history of mankind 😂😂
Reversing "climate change" you say eh. Huh. I just reversed my subscription. Change is a natural occurrence. It is all cyclical my friends.