Skip to main content

Have you heard of carbon removal?

A climate technology startup aims to suck carbon from the atmosphere using a new type of nuclear power plant that’s never been built in the United States.

 https://www.eenews.net/articles/doe-docs-carbon-removal-proposal-bets-on-rare-nuclear-reactors/

Comments

Anonymous said…
I can't help feeling that while this technology is designed to suck CO2 from the air it will for sure suck dollars from my wallet.

We're still awaiting charging stations from the billions in congressional spending.

Obama had Solyndra, we'll see if Biden can one up his predecessor.
Anonymous said…
The economics of modular reactors involves their mass production, hence the modular and deployable design. The issue is that there is very little demand, perhaps none at all, and the long time to license and build them is combined with the higher cost of capital that now prevails

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/nuscale-layoffs-nuclear-power_n_65985ac5e4b075f4cfd24dba

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/nuscale-uamps-nuclear_n_654c317ce4b088d9a74d17db

https://hbr.org/2023/03/capital-is-expensive-again-now-what

These articles mention cost overruns as well. At the same time, of course, costs of wind and solar, as well as energy storage are dropping steadily.

As an aside, if this technology efficiently removes CO2 from the air, I wonder why we can't just power it with coal, and pump those emissions into the ground along with the other carbon it removes. Wyoming where this project is located has immense coal reserves that can be produced at low cost, of course, it is the nation's largest coal producing state.
Anonymous said…
This seems somewhat practical as well, an international project to reduce atmospheric CO2 by refrigerating air in the freezing weather thereby forming CO2 snow: (very little water is contained in air at extremely low temperatuers)

https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/apme/52/2/jamc-d-12-0110.1.xml

This would require a few hundred gigawatts of energy to be made available, this could be done by windmills as he suggests, nuclear power plans, or perhaps by beaming the energy from space in the form of microwaves onto special receiver arrays, using orbiting solar arrays - there could perhaps be other options as well of course,

The CO2 would then be placed for long-term storage in insulated landfills, there might be a low rate of overall sublimation due to insulation of course, which would be easy to deal with.

It does require some intrastructure construction in antarctica but the amount needed could be relatively minimal.

It does look especially feasible if undertaken by many countries rather than one, which would make sense anyways due to the treaties in place around antacctica.

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...

Trump is to gut the labs.

The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.

LLNL un-diversity

Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!