• melsaskca@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    56 minutes ago

    Wasn’t there a story about CO2 under a lake in Africa being released naturally and killing a lot of people in the first several minutes because they couldn’t breathe?

  • Deestan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    7 hours ago

    The energy requirements for storing one ton of co2 are many many times higher than the energy gained from generating one ton of co2 (by oil, gas, coal or biofuel).

    So each MWh spent “storing co2” would be ten times more efficient if used to offset oil extraction to get one MWh less out in the first place.

    This is wasteful greenwashing. If it wasn’t, we’d have broken physics on the level of making perpetual motion machines.

    • ms.lane@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      That’s true but even if we switch entirely over green energy overnight, we’ll still have Steel, still have Bauxite refining for Aluminum, etc, still have to melt and reform glass and aluminum recycled containers, etc, etc.

      There are many processes that we really can’t just get rid of, so they will need carbon capture to ensure they’re not hurting the environment.

  • Lembot_0005@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Don’t we have similar objects on the ground? Wouldn’t it be more convenient and cheap to not hassle with the ocean?

    • Nighed@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      The north sea oil fields are huge, and mostly empty now. They also have the infrastructure already built for gas extraction/injection.

      Makes sense as a location for a trial in that area.

      • myrmidex@belgae.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        wow so they’re ‘storing’ it in the ‘empty’ oil fields? Sounds a lot like Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) to me.

        • Kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Because it is:

          There are four main EOR techniques: carbon dioxide (CO2) injection, gas injection, thermal EOR, and chemical EOR. More advanced, speculative EOR techniques are sometimes called quaternary recovery.[4][5][6][7] Carbon dioxide injection, known as CO2-EOR, is the most common method. In this method, CO2 is injected into a depleted oil field and is mostly left underground.

          CO2-EOR is usually performed using CO2 from naturally occurring underground deposits. It is also sometimes performed using CO2 captured from the flue gas of industrial facilities. When EOR is done using CO2 captured from flue gas, the process can prevent some emissions from escaping. However, there is controversy over whether the overall process is beneficial for the climate. EOR operations are energy-intensive, which leads to more emissions, and further emissions are produced when the recovered oil is burned.

          From Wikipedia.

        • Nighed@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Used to extract fossil fuels, the field is now getting a second lease on life as a means of permanently storing planet-warming carbon dioxide beneath the seabed.

          • myrmidex@belgae.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            If you take them by their word, it sounds perfect.

            I’m worried about Ineos’ ulterior motives. It would not take a lot of change or investment to start up EOR there if any drilling equipment is still in place.