Direct air capture - the world's largest plant switches on | Climeworks

Reclaiming control of our climate future: Mammoth, the world's largest direct air capture and storage plant, is now operational in Iceland.
Join us in celebrating this monumental step towards combating climate change.
www.climeworks.com

[@IAmMrQ]

Is there a live numbers visual? That'd be awesome

[@miketexas4549]

Then we can all countdown to our extinction.

[@h73mwtc]

ONLY 27000 years to be carbon neutral Machine you can wait😂

[@GeorginaKME]

bravo brilliance and perserverance

[@RajaSampathi7]

Good job. ❤

[@bringtheseo]

I recall hearing that these machines were pointless due to such small numbers of carbon actually being removed. It was something like 0.2%

[@user-mm6zh9pe3m]

I would like to believe that this is true. Removing carbon from the atmosphere is stupid.

[@lordbob-up9wd]

This one removes the amount of carbon released into the atmosphere in 4 seconds per years. We’d need like 8 million of these to counter climate change. They’re only usable against the small rest of emissions once we cut them as much as possible

[@reason3581]

It will be significant when they scale it up. But noone has claimed that it is instead of emission mitigations. Obviously we need both.

[@user-mm6zh9pe3m]

@@reason3581 What's wrong with global warming? For example, I live in an area with a very cold climate. If there is warming, the climate will become more comfortable. You propose to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, but how are you suggesting that I heat my home? If it gets warmer, there will be fewer victims of frostbite. Do you want people to still get frostbite?

[@Killerfin100]

Congrats Climeworks

[@AnotherCarChanel]

What happens when the place they store the carbon somehow releases all the carbon they have ever captured at once?

[@BikeAmsterdam]

It reacts with minerals in the rock that form stable compounds immobilizing the gas.

[@AnotherCarChanel]

@BikeAmsterdam that's great! I know it's only the second one made, and unfortunately we have created tons of carbon monoxide in the time I've been typing this(I text slow) doesn't this equate to trying to save a sinking ship with a bucket? We have raped this planet and now it seems like they're are just trying to put her underwear back on and trying to pretend it wasn't us. Whatever Mother Earth decides to do us, we as a parasitic species, deserve what she throws at us. With that being said I am not looking forward to it.

[@reason3581]

@@AnotherCarChanel1) they plan to scale it up to megaton and gigaton capacity 2) DAC is only one of several carbon removal methods. 3) When we reach net zero these technologies will help us get to negative emissions and repair some of the damage we have done.

[@carloscastaneda7886]

That's a lot of carbon credits... 🎉🎉🎉 great job

[@adamcaillouette7375]

So.... When is this thing gonna start up? Also, will you guys make a monthly report about a month after it first turns on? Also, are other companies around the world hard at work on working on their own versions of Mammoth? If so, how soon can they start up?

[@colin1235421]

It already started according to the video.

[@adamcaillouette7375]

@@colin1235421 I swear, if places like the States and Canada really want to cut emissions by 50% before 2030, one of the first things to do is the emergency production and distribution of electrofuels globally, and at reasonable prices, as soon as possible! So many others sound like they rather embrace their doom than try to save the planet.

[@udw.boicot]

I also want to get free-money via carbon credits.. Turning some fans and claiming I am saving the planet, sounds like the green-washing my business needs! While overlooking real pollution and blaming everything on the same gas plants need to grow.. Just to keep on consuming as never before.. Here we have convinced the kids already (big thanks to UNESCO). So we are expecting a high-return ratio by the end of the decade.. Can you tell me where I can get the 2030 pin, so to unlock Tecnocratic-bank (BIS) funds on my next business trip to Switzerland? haha

[@reason3581]

The IPCC clearly states we need both emission mitigation and carbon removal. So explain to me again why this is greenwashing.

[@fj103]

Congratulations

[@The_Hagseed]

So out of curiosity..... You made CO2 during the mining of the raw material. More CO2 to ship it to get processed. More CO2 to have that shipped to be fabricated. CO2 from the fabrication itself. More CO2 to have the fabricated pieces to where they're going. More CO2 to prepare the land. I mean, if you're pumping captured CO2 underground, how much did you release just from digging the hole? More CO2 to construct the building itself..... And add up the amount of CO2 of each person that woke up and drove to work to go through all of that. Don't get me wrong. I think this is great, but realistically, how long until you're at net zero just from the amount of CO2 used to make it? Plus: 0:42 You're having people drive their cars to what looks like the middle of nowhere. Longer drives=more CO2. It almost feels like you're just pouring water on a drowning person because you want to make sure they don't get thirsty.

[@reason3581]

Google "LCA Climeworks"

[@h73mwtc]

If you cout 1.5kg co2 per dollar Is need to run 27000years to be carbon neutral😂

[@davidv1219]

Nice metaphor with the drowning person and thirst!

[@ExtraDryingTime]

Woohoo, I like how they're talking in gigatons!

[@miketexas4549]

Only if you want people do be extinct

[@ThisAmericanStream]

Hope you are not using Elon Musk math.

[@waterlife.1905]

NASA math only works when you have unlimited time and money for a project like the SLS. Yet it is a decade behind schedule and 4 decades behind space x technology wise. And not reusable. Elon Musk is one of our great minds, and will be the equivalent of Einstein or Nicholas Tesla. The guy is brilliant and has vision that is met with success time after time. I understand the jealousy and spite he gets doing so at a fraction of the price of our own space program with NASA. It reminds us that we are being forced to fund wasteful projects that do not have our planet in mind when it comes to reusability, aka smaller carbon footprint.

[@Wheatty]

@@waterlife.1905very well spoken👏🏼

[@waterlife.1905]

@@Wheatty Thank you.

[@senorbinario2855]

Yay!

[@Domozorro]

I'm going to use you as an example. Congratulations!. Thank you for contributing in my purpose. I will observe that you will reply and we can adjust to logic of conversation. Or or I will observe that I will not be replied to and I will use you as an example of? Who am I.

[@mikei8957]

Why do we need this ?

[@colin1235421]

Cause C02 levels keep increasing, and we are heading to a run away situation where things keep getting worse - and growing food is going to become vastly more difficult and expensive, many species of life will die and diseases will thrive....

[@mikei8957]

You mean when they fly planes all day spraying the sky’s to control the weather thru geoengineering? That pollution?

[@lordbob-up9wd]

To reduce CO2 levels just like the comment above said. But it would be way better to just reduce the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere

[@MrWolfen]

You know there is a much much much cheaper options and it's free to use and mother nature takes care of it all it this wonder thing called trees plant some.

[@colin1235421]

No, trees do not do enough at all... And our C02 levels are still increasing by the way.

[@MrWolfen]

@@colin1235421 So what human and animals can live still quite happy at 400 or even 600 ppm. It's a balance. More co2 more green planet less co2 less green less food production and less people. Your choice but I love CO2. I love carbon.

[@user-mm6zh9pe3m]

@@colin1235421 If there is no carbon, then what will all living things be made of?

[@Ramzblood]

​@@colin1235421 you lie!! Of course trees and forest do enough. That's why there all cut down. Because they were doing enough. Electric grid terra forming and mass extinction is all this CO2 biz is about.

[@lordbob-up9wd]

@@colin1235421so instead we’re gonna build 8 million of these things

[@h73mwtc]

How much you createt by buylding it and how much co2 must be created to pay for thys ? And how many years it take to zero them ? I found somwhere Is 1.5kg CO2 per dollar bud im not sure. 650milx1.5is 975mil tuns co2 just for money to thys So they can remove 36000 per year So 27083years to be carbon neutral 😂😂😂🎉🎉🎉 sry for my english

[@reason3581]

They have links to life cycle analysis on their site.

[@blocker8593]

More Co2 the planet becomes more green the tree breathes in Co2 oxygen comes out

[@colin1235421]

Plants will start dying when C02 levels are too high - and good luck buying affordable food because crops wont grow in the increased heat.

[@lordbob-up9wd]

But A) we don’t let more trees grow and B) that only works until you have a certain amount of CO2 emissions.

[@YahiaHegazy]

You know, instead of tearing down the trees, you could have left them where they're at. They do a better job of capturing CO2 and turning it into oxygen. But I digress.

[@ScribblesOfOwls]

It was built in a treeless field in Iceland. Iceland does not have many trees as it is, due to geological shifts in the past, and volcanic activity.

[@user-jf7hy7dv4m]

Always 1% of people on this planet work so the rest of 99% to live happily in their own ignorance

[@colin1235421]

Trees are not enough... we need efficient systems like this.

[@yancgc5098]

Trees also release CO2 during nighttime, they’re not very good at lowering atmospheric CO2 levels

[@lordbob-up9wd]

There weren’t any trees there

[@miketexas4549]

Co2 is GOOD. Why the hell are they trying to remove it? It's pure madness.

[@armynyus9123]

I can picture Archeologists, diging this out in 1000 years or so, then trying to reconstruct its purpose.. They will have to come up with theories about a crazy religion or so. And in fact, that would not be that far off from the truth. Utter insanity.

[@colin1235421]

Cause its increasing far beyond normal levels.

[@miketexas4549]

@@colin1235421 No that's a lie. The vostok ice core samples proved that co2 levels were THIRTY TIMES what they are today, before humans ever industrialized. They also proved that increased CO2 comes AS A RESULT OF rising temperatures, not the other way around. You've been lied to.

[@miketexas4549]

@@colin1235421 No it isn't. That's propaganda.

[@ommanipadmehung3014]

Are you sure the oil and gas companies are not lying? Follow the money - which rich elite group have the most to lose from a transition to clean energy ?

[@melkorrealmz4526]

I feel like this is a bad idea. Like back in medieval times drilling holes into peoples heads to relieve headaches where in the future we learn that's now how you do it most of the time.

[@kohlert55]

So they are selling us air now?!?!

[@miketexas4549]

Spaceballs

[@user-mm6zh9pe3m]

What is all this for? By removing carbon from the atmosphere, you will end up with no carbon remaining in the biosphere! All living things are made of carbon.

[@lordbob-up9wd]

What? The carbon doesn’t disappear. And by letting it stay in the atmosphere the temperature on earth will rise, destroying life as we know it

[@user-mm6zh9pe3m]

But with warming, life in the cold parts of the Earth becomes much more comfortable. Far fewer people die from frostbite. By opposing warming, you are advocating for people to continue to die from the cold.

[@lordbob-up9wd]

@@user-mm6zh9pe3m but more people will die from heatstroke, the habitable regions will move north meaning a lot of people will also move north -> mass migration, there will be more natural disasters (hurricanes…), when the see rises even more habitable land will be lost

[@user-mm6zh9pe3m]

@@lordbob-up9wd Frost is much more dangerous than heat. And if efforts to globally cool the planet are crowned with success, then where should people living in the north go?

[@lordbob-up9wd]

@@user-mm6zh9pe3m the efforts to cool the planet just want to bring it back to pre industrial levels. So for the people living in the north it will be pretty much like it was for the last few thousand years

[@xchopp]

Give me a break. Spinning false hope for profit? You people have no soul.

[@colin1235421]

Thats like saying no one should have started modern medicine... it takes time and investment to get somewhere.

[@daviddinkins7009]

People are so gullible and dumb.

[@cnhiggy]

think this is a stupid idea and a waste of money! but thats just me

[@reason3581]

Yes it’s just you. The IPCC clearly states we need both emission reduction and carbon dioxide removal.

[@cnhiggy]

@@reason3581 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@cnhiggy]

You're on drugs

[@wm2357]

Or just could've planted trees

[@reason3581]

Trees are fantastic. We need to do both. It’s not either or.

[@jasonscreations99]

This is the dumbest project possible…..

[@colin1235421]

Why? Please also indicate what your scientific background is...

[@user-mm6zh9pe3m]

@@colin1235421 Because sometimes you have to use your head. All carbon is removed from the atmosphere by this machine forever!

[@yancgc5098]

@@user-mm6zh9pe3m The goal is to reduce CO2 from 427 ppm to 280 ppm, y’know, the level we had in preindustrial times

[@user-mm6zh9pe3m]

@@yancgc5098 But the more carbon in the atmosphere, the more opportunities for plant growth. Why is a small increase in the share of carbon dioxide so bad?

[@yancgc5098]

@@user-mm6zh9pe3m Because we never needed this extra CO2 in the atmosphere changing our global climate and destabilizing our society in order to feed the billions of people on Earth, we were doing just fine with 280 ppm of CO2