Concrete Carbon Capture. A pathway to net zero?

[@powderpig]

Can we all please just stop and take a second to appreciate the amount of work that goes into the production of these videos. Absolutely brilliant!

[@johnhirshleifer5947]

Amen brother!

[@peterjohnstaples]

I agree, It is a pity that he can not show any evidence for for man made C02 climate change. I would have thought that he would have forged something like "Potholer"

[@powderpig]

@@peterjohnstaples who needs evidence these days?

[@powderpig]

@Lucien Studio Are you a bot?

[@suchalad]

STOP DROP ROLL!!!!

[@blueberrylane8340]

Finally some concrete news about carbon capture.

[@robmcilroy1894]

Maybe this technology could help cement humanity a future?

[@irri3191]

Now for informative directions on how to invest in these companies. And only the best of the best.

[@markplott4820]

its FAKE NEWS Blueberry.

[@trioofone8911]

HAHA 😄

[@trioofone8911]

@@robmcilroy1894 oof. Stop. It hurts

[@syedwaliuddinsaaquib1114]

I have worked on geopolymer concrete in the form of aerated concrete. It gives good mechanical performance . Good thing about geopolymer is that we can make use of industrial waste such as iron slags , mine tailings, fly Ash etc

[@jamesrobertson4098]

I wonder if it's possible to replace some of these industrial waste materials with a form of powdered hemp, giving the need for another use of hemp ?

[@syedwaliuddinsaaquib1114]

@@jamesrobertson4098 hemp concrete does exsist . Research is Still being done in this material . In France , they use hemp concrete blocks to construct house.

[@jamesrobertson4098]

@@syedwaliuddinsaaquib1114 yeah I know that but it's a very labour intensive, quite primitive material. I mean to actually replace fly ash or other waste materials within wet concrete

[@inanutshell7679]

Carbon capture is one of the key pillars of reaching net zero, along with efficiency, low-carbon electricity, electrification, alternative fuels (such as hydrogen and bioenergy), and behavioural changes. Only if those 6 are combined will we have a fighting chance of reaching net zero. Nice video!

[@johnlarson111]

hempcrete continues to absorb co2. plant hemp. hemp grows faster than trees has multiple uses including nutrition , clothing. bio degradable plastic and fuel. anything that can be made from oil can be made from hemp

[@stuart_oneill]

Are you in touch with this channel? Or do you have connections to help create a fact based, business oriented hemp KZbin channel? My avatar should get you to a contact point somewhere on the net. I'm very interested in the entire carbon capture topic. Hemp, if there's enough content, may have a channel. Or one needs to be created.

[@rossmcleod7983]

I’ll be building with hempcrete on a major home renovation because it ticks an extraordinary number of boxes. Sadly, hempcrete has been saddled with more lame stoner references than you can poke a stick at, but ignore the dippy hippy baggage and look at it for what it is.

[@JustHaveaThink]

100% agree. Hemp is coming soon on the channel :-)

[@artiomvas]

@@JustHaveaThink The CO2 produced for the manufacture of structural concrete (using ~14% cement) is estimated at 410 kg/m3. CarbonCure claims their method captures 15-23 kg of CO2 per m3 of structural concrete. That is just a 3.6-5.6% reduction.

[@johnlarson111]

@@artiomvasthere is no silver bullet for carbon capture. there will need to be more that one technology in use. this is just one of them

[@bardfm]

A promising tech I've come across in the past is Hemp concrete or "hempcrete". It doesn't have quite the strength that conventional concrete does, but for smaller build applications like houses and patios, etc. making the concrete directly out of a plant material is a good way to keep the carbon fixed in the building and not the environment.

[@julmaass]

It's called hemp 'crete', but it's not really for structural application. It has a small fraction of the strength of concrete, which is good for self-supporting walls but not much else. On the other hand, i'm exploring the possibility of using it as a thermal mass (and fire protection) in buildings that employ light constructions, like wood frames, thus eliminating two disadvantages of wood structures.

[@MCshlthead]

cool so we can all dle with nice hemp patios in our back gardens

[@abaddon2148]

@@julmaass even replacing concrete garden walls with hempcrete is better for the environment. whatever helps people get off of harmful products!

[@elliotsmith9812]

I worked on a system to pyrolyze switch grass into hydrogen. The grass has a very deep root system which traps a lot of CO2. At the time the process was chewing up a lot of the Nickel catalysis we used, but it did work.

[@elliotsmith9812]

@Kate Wolf Totally, but no one has hired me to do that yet. Also, there are 7 billion of us. What worked in prehistory may not feed 7 or 8 or 9 billion people. Certainly not under strict capitalism and democracy.

[@melvinhoi2372]

Elliot is a smart guy

[@elliotsmith9812]

@@melvinhoi2372 thank you.

[@vsiegel]

@@elliotsmith9812 I do not think democracy is blocking here, but the strict capitalism probably is. In Germany, things in this area are quite possible on democratic basis. I think there is a relation to the form of capitalism. We call ours "Soziale Marktwirtschaft", "social market economy". It is not a form of socialism, even though in the US, this kind of system is called "democratic socialism". Instead, it is a "social democracy". It takes a lot of strictness out of capitalism if nobody is affraid of being hungry or homeless, for example.

[@elliotsmith9812]

@@vsiegel I lived in Germany for too short a time and it is a very remarkable place. In the US, democracy gets corrupted by money. Americans can be made to turn against spotted owls, wolves or manatee if you spend enough money on the message.

[@geordonworley5618]

I think its VERY important to keep in mind with all of these processes is that they DO NOT capture carbon and are NOT carbon negative, despite some incorrect comments made to the contrary. It is incorrect to say that any of these technologies are capturing carbon overall. The calcium oxide used as an input to these concretes is produced by heating calcium carbonate. Curing any concrete will reintroduce CO2 into the concrete, but it cannot ever be more than the amount originally freed from the Calcium Carbonate originally. These projects are attempting to REDUCE the carbon footprint of concrete by maximizing the amount of Calcium Carbonate produced. Again, these are excellent developments, but they DO NOT, in any way, make concrete production carbon negative or EVEN carbon neutral, they only make it better than it is now. I want to emphasize this so people don't believe the absurd claims being flung around about this technology. We need REAL carbon capture technology to become carbon negative, and this concrete stuff is NOT net negative, it is NET POSITIVE in producing CO2. Please make sure to spread the word about this.

[@mike_318]

+1 on this - unless the processes eliminate calcining, there is a pretty hefty stoichiometric CO2 release (as mentioned early in the video.) I would have been very curious to see the processes picked apart in more detail, to find out if any of these methods actually found ways around that.

[@andrejasironic4561]

So true. I always wondered how cement industry isn’t CO2 neutral (at least considering the production and hardening reaction, not accounting for energy use). When he ended up with notion that it could be carbon negative, it just raised a question: Whaaat?.

[@dsfs17987]

we already have the CO2 capture technology we need, its called photosynthesis, except we also think that it is great to destroy that using fossils and then complain that all global warming is due to CO2 and that all men are to blame at this point it is no longer science, its basically middle age religion - inquisition sort of arrangement that steers the world

[@hydrarodrigues3995]

You may be confusing concrete with cement. The calcination reaction that releases CO2 happens in the CEMENT manufacturing process, not concrete. Cement is only around 11% of the volume of concrete, so the geochemical limitation you are talking about is only true for that 11%. The rest of the concrete's volume is mostly aggregates (~75%), air, and water. Quite a lot of CO2 can be captured within the aggregates prior to mixing (e.g., BluePlanet technology). Additionally, in many cases, cementitious materials are added to the concrete mixture to increase the CO2 absorption capacity of the concrete (e.g., fly ash and steel slag).

[@geordonworley5618]

@@hydrarodrigues3995 Your point is noted, but this is not the technology presented in the video, which was focused on the cement. I am sure it is possible to capture carbon in concrete through other means, but at the time this video was released the news was talking all about this "carbon negative concrete". Tons of disinformation was spreading at the time, and they even won several large awards for this technology that doesn't work.

[@I-am-theStorm]

It would be fascinating to see you do a follow-up to this in a couple of years to see how this pans out

[@michaelneumeyer2295]

Most definitely! And would you be so kind to add the use of titanium dioxide (TiO) in concrete materials to "filter smog"?

[@HaroldBrice]

David Kings: It is now May of 2023. How is this hairbrained idea working? Who had to pay double for gasoline or oil or electricity to help pay for it?

[@I-am-theStorm]

@@HaroldBrice Agreed, a follow up would be informative

[@livingladolcevita7318]

I think you covered it previously but using the gas to support growing crops in greenhouses is one use, eg the sugar beet factories producing sugar pump the co2 into tomato growing greenhouses next to the factory

[@davidcox8961]

Hempcrete also captures and sequesters CO2. Have you looked into that. It sounds like the ideal building material for homes.

[@phildude2]

@@onlyscience7120 that's perfect in very hot climates

[@bioboertuur]

so a self carrying filler block that you can at more insulation to and stops the wind? But than again, why not use pure straw bales with a render of you liking? It's fire proof, more carbon, non toxic, easy to install, ... I have to admit I was impresed with the test results from the German fire safety tests. 90min torching from one side gives a noticable temperature rise on the other side if you put your hand on it. Smoke is coming out, but no where near as toxic as with synthetics smoking and it's smoking, not burning as there is not enough oxygen available. (fire safe = keeping the fire away for 30min)

[@leonesperanza3672]

Hempcrete is not a structural material, but it's good alternative to CHB.

[@davidcox8961]

@@leonesperanza3672 I know that it's not suitable for the structure. What is CHB? Portland cement? I like the fact that a wall built of hempcrete will continue to capture CO2 and will turn to stone like eventually. I want to get some hurds to experiment building with.

[@svenjorgenson3224]

Not to mention the CO2 taken out as it grows to maturity.

[@richardlangley90]

I'd have to listen a second time but I believe, Dave, that you commented on the building industry wanting to use more lumber because it sequesters carbon. This has been a concern of mine since the first time I heard it. We used to believe, here in Canada, that our forests were unlimited but the truth is that we have decimated an enormous amount of our woodlands. With the various Green new deal type programs coming forward that suggest we should revamp all buildings to make them energy efficient I just wonder where all the wood is going to come from. I even saw someone stating that young growing trees sequester more carbon than old trees, thus supporting the notion that we should cut down trees for timbers and the replanting will result in more carbon sequestering....total nonsense....and very frightening. Reminds me of bio fuels where wood scraps would be used for fuel for making electricity....now we mow down entire forests, pelletize them and ship them around the world as "green fuel". We really have to carefully analyze every proposed option to make sure it isn't just a gimmick for someone to get rich at our collective expense.

[@reuireuiop0]

Exactly. It is "mature" forest that has been on place for way over a century, that fixes most carbon. The best way to harvest timber from such forest, is by selective cut, s method devised in German and Swiss mountains, where large scale harvest would destabilize the hillside whereas a tree by tree cut leaves the forest ecosystem intact, with it protection. However, such system is far from the rash "let's take all the timber out" industrial methods we see in most American forests (and surprisingly, Nordic. Turns out, über civilized Sweden can't even safeguard it's old growth from mass harvest...) Some say, fix this by putting a sustainable label on it. But experience proves, one depends on reliable government, which excludes most of the world (remember Rumänian foresters being shot by guys wanting their timber, instead of nature conservation.) So, as a Forester, I'm against the use of timber and biofuel as a climate solution. Any ANY extra demand for wood will only increase the pressure on the few remaining older woodlands. Actually 20yrs into 21c, forest is still being mined like it were coal or oil. A total waste of our greatest resource

[@julmaass]

From my understanding, fully mature trees sequester carbon at a slower rate than young trees, so mature forests are sequestering at a slower rate. That's doesn't mean that we should just cut them down and replace replant them, but that original statement isn't wrong. The amazon is not really sequestering more CO2 year on year; it IS, however, a huge carbon store that should be left alone.

[@richardlangley90]

@@julmaass Julmaass, it is my understanding that as long as the the tree is alive it continues to add to it's carbon store. The older the tree the more carbon that it contains. This is why cutting trees for lumber isn't as detrimental to the environment as burning the wood. Using the lumber to build a structure that lasts 100yrs means the carbon remains captured until such time as the structure is destroyed. Cutting down a tree, pelletizing and burning it and planting a seedling in it's place is generating an enormous immediate contribution of CO2 into the atmosphere that will not be recaptured until the seedling has reached the same age as the tree that was cut down (assuming the same species etc). The seedling will never capture the carbon that was released to cut down the tree, transport it, shred it, pelletize it, transport it to the incinerator, feed it into the incinerator, transport the waste away from the incinerator. At a time where we are being told we have to find a way to not just stop adding carbon but actually removing carbon it is insanity to cut any old growth trees for any reason and even more insane to burn trees. BIO fuels are a fraud and not even slightly Green. The only renewable factor is that trees and plants can be continually planted and harvested but the impact of burning them, or anything, is unsustainable. Apologies if I have gone off on a tangent.

[@fayebird1808]

@@richardlangley90 And a newly planted forest is carbon positive for at least 20 years!

[@richardlangley90]

@@fayebird1808 Faye, a common misconception. google the following sentences in quotes to find the full text "The upshot is that a typical forest continues to capture additional carbon until the forest is about 800 years old." "At the other end of the age spectrum, freshly harvested forest land - even if replanted with little trees - continues to lose carbon dioxide to the air for about 15 years before finally becoming a carbon sink." If these sentences are accepted as fact then it becomes very clear that clear cutting trees is a seriously bad idea, it also drives home the fact that burning trees and/or plants of any kind is contributing to our CO2 problems...the data I don't have (yet) is the combined penalty of destroying the forest AND burning it - how does this compare to other energy options. More reading required. Thanks for your comment....I would not have found the above otherwise.

[@oueeiijayii]

Wonderful presentation! To add to what you're saying. Thank you for expanding the concrete equation rather than as many do simplistically rejecting its valuable functions. DELINEATING CONCRETES 1000s of DIVERSE END USES is important to understanding its relative contribution to the CO2 equation. The diverse variety of concrete 'end-uses', must be delineated & evaluated as part of any equation, in order to evaluate concrete's energy or CO2 footprint. Examples: Thin (eg. 3/16th, 1/2 & 1 inch) CEMENT-BOARD, which is a concrete composite building-sheet with plastic covered fiberglass fabric, replaces many thick concrete applications with more strength, water-proof, fire-proof, vapour-barrier qualities, a much lowered CO2 footprint & ability to be disassembled when needed. Cement board used in shower & bath stalls or high moisture areas creates durable options for retrofitting existing building. I've designed & used a Cement-Board composter for over 10 years now which eliminates rodent-access & has no degradation of materials. The 2 foot by 2 foot on the ground composter at 4 feet high (cut from a single 4' x 8' sheet at 30$ CDN) serves 4 households with 9 people & will likely last from 30 to 50 if not 100 years of use. Because cement-board does not degrade, kitchen cuttings are added wet with dish water, creating wet decomposition at 2 months to completion. sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/design/5-cement-board-composters MODULAR FACTORY-BUILT cement-board building BLOCKS & PANELS are creating totally adjustable (expandable & contractable) buildings with much less cement & CO2 footprint. FOAM-CRETE in which soap bubbles are added to concrete slurry, reduces the amount of cement used by 1/3rd to 1/4. Foamcrete can be delivered through hoses from trucks into small 3/4 inch holes from the inside or outside of walls, floors & ceilings into existing wood-frame buildings to create: Non-toxic, Fireproof, Waterproof, Insect-proof, Rodent-proof, building strengthening (when properly designed & calculated) & the best insulation. I've been experimenting with Foamcrete for hollowed-out coconut-shell swallow nests with wonderful results. Foamcrete can retrofit, retain & valorize rural & urban society's mostly wood-frame infrastructure of housing & buildings, without the CO2 costs of building anew as well as lower building costs with varying components. Foamcrete, aka aircrete, AirKrete en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foam_concrete Air krete Greensulation multiple videos & picture descriptions www.airkrete.com/video-gallery.php Retro-fitting buildings with air krete www.airkrete.com/retro-gallery.php air krete www.airkrete.com/ Fireproof. Aircrete credited with Euroclass A1 fire safety is the highest fire safety standard. You can build a furnace with it and it will not burn down! Mar 14, 2019 8 Reasons why AirCrete needs to replace Concrete in construction. How to make Aircrete www.domegaia.com/how-to-make-aircrete.html Aircrete Experiments Part 2 - How strong is aircrete kzbin.info/www/bejne/n2qxZoSnmpeSl5I Aircrete Experiments Part-3 - Jim White kzbin.info/www/bejne/bZvapZKfeJ6slas Aircrete Experiments Part 4 Jim White kzbin.info/www/bejne/rXXMgp6XrtiWl7M Aircrete Machine for under 30$ DIY kzbin.info/www/bejne/l4Sve3aGh5aDqNk

[@fredericrike5974]

Fireproof? I'll agree that concrete wont burn, but some of the concrete in the Empire State Building still contains enough water to spall explosively and significantly reduce strength, and not in a very predictable manner, either. Steel doesn't burn either, but under heat presents other problems such a deforming and sagging- the effects of a fire at over 1200 degrees is what caused the pancake collapse of the World Trade Towers on 9/11/01. the trapped air bubbles and their expansion under applied heat would want some deep looking into. Yes, it is a better material than what is in the market now, but it, too, has costs and engineering liabilities.

[@oueeiijayii]

​@@fredericrike5974 Thanks for your reply. Yes "costs and engineering liabilities", unless end-use is differentiated. Lets analyse each of the many 1000s of concrete applications according to their 'end-use' in comparison with other options. Its definitely not a matter of applying Foam-crete or Cement-board to every present cement function because they are all very different. Some of the web-links I've provided above delve into fireproofing, mostly for existing wood-frame buildings, quite amazing results for those applications. Ecological design is specific sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/design

[@fredericrike5974]

@@oueeiijayii Gotcha! I didn't say you or the piece were wrong- I did try to point out how hard that would be to sell to a board of directors, most of whom are interested in profits this quarter and none of whom should be expected to give a damn about ten years or forty quarters from now. Or the politicians aversion to anything that will take beyond their present term of office to get any credit for. Eisenhower was one of the few- and the Interstate Highway System made him lots of enemies within and without the Republican party. Sorry, I'm "long winded", but the problem being discussed with an eye for future solution isn't simple and will not lend itself to a short answer.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thanks for the kind feedback Douglas. I really appreciate it, especially from someone who has such great hands-on experience. Keep up your great work!

[@deebie8474]

Hempcrete is a sustainable carbon negative building material which can be grown in most countries. Check it out, an amazing material to work with, as is the hemp plant. Great presentation thanks

[@johnwildgoose1234]

@BLaZeY due to it's lack of compressive strength

[@pigtailsboy]

I'm given to feel that Bamboo of different types as well as other fast growing botanicals is offering up sufficient resource if we introduce it to the wider public and industry. There are varieties of bamboo that are so efficient and prolific they could replace a timber in many of our products.

[@holihsredlumednil6847]

@@AustinThomasPhD good call. It's really difficult to know which of these many proposals to pursue without further research. But I will say I'm glad people are discussing our ever narrowing options.

[@n1mbusmusic606]

its labor intensive and can't be used for everything. limited application.

[@gg3675]

You've become a staple part of my Sunday mornings :-)

[@keithnajar6485]

Great information Dave! Another way of reducing concrete in building is by utilising hollow-core concrete slabs - the savings in concrete starts at 49.9% for a 200mm thick concrete slab and increases upwards of 55% for thicker slabs. In addition to this, using the Swedish patented invention of 'Termodeck' and passing air-conditioned air through the slab, a further saving on energy costs of 40% to 60% can be achieved! Every bit counts!

[@drpk6514]

I think it was over 15 years ago I read a Canadian firm made kind of concrete which throughout its life time it absorbs CO2 from the air. They were claiming it would solve the problem of CO2 if their technology was used everywhere... It is fascinating that concrete alone produces as much CO2 (8%) as agriculture (9%). I believe one of the easiest ways that can reduce the CO2 in the air is by adding chemicals such as iron or wastes such as ash from burning coal (not sure if the heavy-metals could be separated) to the ocean desert area and let the plankton do their job. This way the carbon will go back where they came from, in the bottom of the oceans. Also might result in more see food...

[@thirsty_dog1364]

Researches claim they can produce cheap and clean Hydrogen fuel ://kzbin.info/www/bejne/bpC4kJyue7Rrq9k

[@ElectricityTaster]

all concrete absorbs CO2 as it cures. These concrete carbon capture technologies only accelerate the process. What would normally take 30 years is done in a matter of days. This is good, but also bad if you are using steel-reinforced structures as it increases rusting. That is why most current applications for these new concrete technologies is modular concrete units with no steel reinforcement.

[@jimlarsen6782]

Concrete absorbs co2 to turn calcium oxide back into calcium carbonate. Making cement powder is what releases co2 from limestone and the fuel to heat it also, so its a dicey balance.

[@garethbayman8713]

This is one of the most interesting videos I have seen and I truly hope that governments will get onboard and give incentives to the cement and concrete industry to get this process going. Thank you for the good work that you are doing to give us this information.

[@BiosWars]

It's very good and encouraging to know that companies are working on and with these new concrete processes. Hopefully, these types of actions will inspire other businesses to continue with proper R&D. Every contribution combines into real Innovative Eco Solutions.

[@fredericrike5974]

Sadly, most of the petrochemical industry has lost touch with it's own earlier business models; most of the Seven Sisters (the seven largest, international petro corps) were in the coal business long before they got into oil. They should know, first hand, what and how to move from one paradigm to another. The direct cost is a factor, yet a few seem to be beginning the embrace of alternative(some of them, only to stave of larger public disapproval) solutions.But that direct cost is something the major stock holders do not want to take responsibility for, and they have not been in the business of through going renewal of their product like say the car industry has been through. But note the companies that haven't embraced this are struggling to even stay in the market now that the public pressure to improve and expand their products exists. Note that governments, particularly democracies, do not like roles that make them the visible author of economic winners and losers. So far most of the good work in America has been done by philanthropy- Bill Gates' project is a good example- but that is because, beyond his "philanthropy" Mr. Gates sees potential to create another start up that could rival MicroSoft in both the rate of growth and the huge profits that suggest. More men and women like the Gates need to be encouraged all over the world.

[@BiosWars]

​@@fredericrike5974 Very well said. But that does not negate the fact that we must all truly put many efforts forward. That will hopefully push them “The Elites” into seeing things differently, as is the case through this channel. These efforts should show by our actions and examples, that many of us, Namely 4 Billion of us, as was seen in 2019, will not stand by any longer and watch as the world burns. It's time for them to begin to see and truly comprehend that all profits are not of a monetary nature. Their so called new ways of doing business and holding the economy on the edge, can't last forever. Proof of this can be seen in Saudi Arabia / Mid-East, where they have combined most of their Petrol industries into one large IPO, knowing that their Petrol futures are possibly in jeopardy. With that said, petroleum is not going away any time soon, but we should understand that even if many Energy Solutions or Reclamation Solutions transpire within some years, that oil will still play a great part in many of those Solutions. It's time for a balanced approach to all things pertaining to Ecology, Economy and a proper Eco Education. And the sooner that all get onboard, the sooner we can accelerate our economic growth.

[@fredericrike5974]

@@BiosWars Very good overall view of the petro system as it really is. Some of the still very operational Seven Sisters (seven large international oil companies) are already over 100 corporate years old, and they aren't likely to go away at all. If they didn't sell one gallon of gasoline or diesel tomorrow, they are still the source of a huge amount of the base products in our plastics and food packaging industries. I believe even the closed cell foams being sprayed on for insulation and vapor barriers owes a great deal to the petro industry. We would do ourselves much good by finding ways for the existing industry to remake itself, as it did when liquid fuels replaced coal aboard military naval vessels in WW1, and then by more accident and good fortune a waste by product became the cheap fuel of choice for the motorcar (gasoline was so useless, it's earliest forms were separated from the crude as it emerged from the ground in places like Pennsylvania that it was tapped into a ditch leading to a nearby waterway- where it would catch fire sometimes and burn for miles and miles for days). As to getting the "elites" to see things differently, a cautionary tale lies in the story of how the Greene family of Oklahoma, who own Hobby Lobby, a large seller of foreign sourced goods, bought 16,000 Iraqi ancient artifacts from a couple of ME "dealers" after we had finally got some semblance of control- a purchase through people their own internal and outside attorneys advised them against due to knowing that most of the museums in Bagdad had been looted and the "vendors" were impossible to vet . the Nation of Iraq was able to make clear valid charges that those artifacts were stolen from their museums- the Greene's returned the 3500 artifacts the Iraqi's had substantially proven and kept the rest, and they paid a fine. As long as there is any profit in the position they have, most of those elites will continue to do what they are doing, They made say they are doing it your way, but out the back door, they will still operate the same old shell game. We are headed for some very tough moments at home and internationally-get ready for an extremely bumpy ride!

[@BiosWars]

@@fredericrike5974 There are some of those companies attempting to remake themselves, BP comes to mind. Nevertheless, there are many companies operating in many countries that could show allot more concern for cleaning up their orphan wells. If not helping to form a different type of enterprise, like geothermal in those places. Of course only where appropriate or possible. As for the rich, not all rich people are created equal, When I refer to the “Elite” I’m referring to those that try and control everything. There are those that truly attempt to help humanity, as long as they remain Human. Then there’s Hope. With that said, you’re right about an extremely bumpy ride. Nevertheless, humanity has been through worse in its past, and I believe we’ll fare better, as long as we stay positive,

[@fredericrike5974]

@@BiosWars Very true. FWIW, Bill Gates, who was vilified for some of his business practices (he bought up a lot of independent programmers stuff, including patents, etc and many said it was unfair- but he developed several into viable components of the MS o/s system), but he is now directly involved in design/engineering for cost feasible carbon capture systems and also into research about nuclear systems that actually can consume and reduce existing waste nuclear materials instead of creating more of it. But for every Bill Gates (or Warren Buffet, George Soros) there are a dozen or so of the others, and they and the politicians they buy do there utmost to blacken their names. Teddy Roosevelt, one of the 20th Century's most beloved presidents was hated by most of his own class, and openly reviled for his national parks and especially for the AntiTrust Act that was so instrumental in breaking the grip of the elite in the early decade of the 20th century. FWIW, he and Lincoln, both Republicans, are on the Mt Rushmore Monument along with Washington !

[@notlessgrossman163]

Let's not forget planting more trees (or other photosynthetic plants) is one of cheapest ways to sequester carbon. With timber framing lumber construction to use the wood.

[@JustHaveaThink]

Absolutely - as I poitned out a the end of the video :-)

[@clarksmith6850]

Replace the trees with hemp. Speeds up the process by 5 times.

[@hansjorgkunde3772]

@@clarksmith6850 yeah Hemp is such a useful plant. And there are THC free versions of it by now. It got abolished in favor of wood like 100 years ago. You can also make paper from it..

[@imakevideos5377]

@@clarksmith6850 If we could just get the usa to replace the mega corn fields with hemp fields. You can litterally get 3 to 4 growth cycles in a year at mega scales

[@peterjohnstaples]

@@JustHaveaThink Hi Cyril, can you please help Dave and post the scientific empirical evidence you have to prove that Man made C02 is causing harm to the environment and then I can pass it on to the climate scientists at the CSIRO in Australia so they can wipe the egg off their faces as the produced Zero for the Aust. Senate enquiry. After a twenty years search and spending $30,000,000 AUD plus expenses produced Zero evidence.

[@chantlive24]

Have a look at carbon gold - This is using biochar to soak up CO2 and massively improve soil facility.

[@Don-lw8ly]

what about Hemp Crete how does that stack up? It does capture co2 in the hemp and lock it up in the wall. It is nearly fire proof. And has a high insulating value. Have you looked at it?

[@peterjohnstaples]

Nah, he smoked up the experiment.

[@stormelemental13]

Hempcrete is made with lime. Turning limestone into lime is the part of the concrete making process that releases all of the CO2. It also isn't a suitable replacement for concrete. Hempcrete has insulation value because of voids in the mix and the hollow nature of the hemp stalks. This means it doesn't have the strength to be a structural component. If you compress it down to get structural strength, you've gotten rid of the air pockets that make it insulation.

[@wiezyczkowata]

@@stormelemental13 but hemp eats CO2 when it grows so wouldn't that balance itself? and then hemprecte eats CO2 and turns into stone, there was a hemcrete found in some caves from 1500 years ago,

[@stormelemental13]

@@wiezyczkowata It isn't a suitable structural replacement for concrete. Which is what the video is about. Hempcrete is possibly a good insulation material to use, but it isn't a good structural material. They have different uses. As for the CO2 balance of hempcrete, I don't know how it ultimately balances out. Lime does absorb CO2 when it is curing, but not as much as is generate by it's creation. I don't know if combined with hemp's draw down of CO2 while growing the process is neutral, negative, positive.

[@NewEarthAwakening]

There’s also aircrete, which is made by mixing soap foam into the concrete mix for an extremely lightweight and insulative concrete. Like hempcrete it doesn’t have the strength for large commercial buildings, but it has similar strength to wood and can be used for building homes and insulating them. It seems that if the foam could incorporate CO2 bubbles instead of air bubbles, this could also be a very easy way to capture carbon, especially if all that was needed was conventional concrete, a foam machine, and a tank of CO2. Hmmm.

[@johndoyle4723]

Alternative fuels are used in many kilns throughout the world, these are usually wastes, such as tyres, plastic, oils and hydrocarbons, meat and bone meal, this emits less CO2 and solves a waste problem. Alternative raw materials derived from wastes are also used instead of quarrying , eg Gypsum from scrap plaster board which is a very problematic material for landfill. The gypsum may have started life from flue gas desulphurisation. You are correct the construction industry and cement makers are acutely aware of the CO2 problem, and working hard on solutions. Your estimate of 1500 deg C for the kilns is a bit high and would give NOx problems, 1250 deg c more usual. Thanks for interesting discussion.

[@bartroberts1514]

If the "alternative" fuel is fossil-sourced, then it's still fossil emission. There's plenty of biomass to use for heat, but more to the point, OPC cement is terrible stuff: weak, slow, poor quality, expensive to produce. Geopolymer is far cheaper -- 70% lower raw material cost!-- and up to twice as strong, with significantly better environmental resistance and curing time just 4% of OPC's. What's more, it only needs about one sixteenth the energy to produce, at a so much lower temperature that electric induction heating is practical and can be cheaper than using trash or coal.

[@ronbaker6744]

Also many Kilns burn toxic wastes due to the high temps required to destroy them. This eliminates chemical wastes and the kiln operator charges a fee to process it. So there are other things to consider. All in all i agree that these technologies are needed. The next part is to look at ways to bring this conversation into the public consciousness.

[@Hans9078]

I have seen this at ACI and this is a very new technology with little traction in my opinion. Even with a big push for research, it will take 20 years or longer to see any level of wide spread use. Structural and civil engineers adopt these technologies very slowly and rightfully so. Many of these technologies have massive down sides like long term durability. I will need to see much more research before I would touch any of the products.

[@jonathanclark5240]

Great info! It's wonderful to see solutions to the concrete carbon footprint issue. I'm sceptical about the 2050 goals, anytime I see it mentioned by corporations or government agencies. Not only is it too liitle too late, but I feel it's just a way to not take responsibility and give the problem to the next generation. Ambitious 2025 and 2030 goals are needed to make a real change.

[@timbushell8640]

Corporations are well verses in footdragging and destroy people in that process - see; Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming - Naomi Oreskes, Erik M. Conway

[@peterjohnstaples]

Hi Cyril, can you please help Dave and post the scientific empirical evidence you have to prove that Man made C02 is causing harm to the environment and then I can pass it on to the climate scientists at the CSIRO in Australia so they can wipe the egg off their faces as the produced Zero for the Aust. Senate enquiry. After a twenty years search and spending $30,000,000 AUD plus expenses produced Zero evidence.

[@squamish4244]

Carbon capture and storage is being researched with great speed to make it more efficient and drop the price down, because it will be necessary on a massive scale to solve the crisis. And it can't be too expensive in a world that is already subsidizing oil for $5 trillion a year. Cheaper Carbon Capture Is on the Way - Marathon Research Effort Drives Down Cost: scitechdaily.com/cheaper-carbon-capture-is-on-the-way-marathon-research-effort-drives-down-cost/ This channel can wallow in its own gloom a lot and talking about solutions is helpful.

[@J4Zonian]

There are also other solutions: cob, adobe, straw bale, Roman concrete, and other construction techniques. They'll work most places for most purposes, and there are examples of 800 to 1000 year old buildings still standing that were (obviously) built without fossil fuels, in places from Africa to Wales. The people building and regulating building now will never agree to these solutions; they'll have to be removed from power and replaced by people who will do what's necessary.

[@bartroberts1514]

Cement as an industry has been foot-dragging and hostile to low-fossil-emission initiatives, but incredibly welcoming to greenwashing. 1. Geopolymer is a vastly superior _AND_ lower cost product with substantial history almost a third as long as OPC has been in existence, but with only about 3% uptake due industry acting against the best interest of end customers. Alkali-activated cements can be made entirely fossil-emission free and are naturally net carbon negative through curing. 2. Geopolymer in particular has high affinity for biochar in aggregate mix, which without significant loss of strength reduces concrete weight as much as 40% while improving insulation and environmental resistance, sequestering four hundred times the carbon of the various CO2 injection methods, plus it disposes of forest wastes that otherwise become fuel for wildfires. 3. Embodied fossil emissions from burning coal or fossil wastes (oil, plastic, tires, etc.) in clinkering is enormous, and unnecessary; there's plenty of woody wastes that could be the fuel instead. Turning limestone to clinker for OPC requires substantially higher temperatures for longer time than turning kaolin into metakaolin, enough that it makes the difference between having to burn and being able to use electric heating, but even if not the difference in fuel used is huge. 4. Concrete is overused in infrastructure, where alternatives like gabion, engineered timber, and rammed earth or the like are too often ignored when for a particular application they are clearly superior.

[@Chrmngblly]

Gen IV MSRs could provide the heat to make Geopolymer as well as desalinated seawater as byproducts of generating electricity. There need to be industrial complexes built on a large scale to take advantage of this. I hope folks get over their irrational fear of all things nuclear. It is the cleanest and safest of all renewables. I was unaware of most of the points you make although I leave it to others to decide if concrete is overused.

[@bartroberts1514]

@@Chrmngblly Solar or wind, geothermal or hydro or biofuel could provide the heat, too, at 40%-80% lower cost. I have no irrational fear of nuclear; I'm more concerned about those who irrationally love all things nuclear regardless of how bad they are for the budget. Also, it's an extraordinary stretch to call MSRs "renewable", "clean" or "safe" when they leave 300+years of problems equal to their own mass (unless there's a catastrophic failure), plus virtually unlimited problems of a smallish fraction of their mass. Get MSR's down to 60% of their current cost, and solve the problem of needing to stand guard over them for centuries, and if we still need their services after all the solar and wind, geothermal and hydro are deployed, that will be time to talk about it.

[@johnhiggs5932]

@@Chrmngblly Thorium reactors are cheaper, safer, and much more efficient than classic fission reactors. It is frustrating to know that we have had this technology for over 50 years, but didn’t develop it because the US government wanted the waist uranium from classic fission reactors for weapons. Maybe the Chinese will put nuclear energy technology to better use. They are building thorium reactors for full scale use now. Hopefully they have learned some lessons from their hydroelectric catastrophes.

[@fellinuxvi3541]

@@bartroberts1514 Waste is something we'll have to store and wait for though. There is no time to figure out a more comprehensive solution, we should have started building the reactors decades ago.

[@bartroberts1514]

@@fellinuxvi3541 Nuclear will be too slow, provides too little, and as Elon Musk points out in most cases delivers less power than solar panels on the same area as is used for reactor + set aside. IPCC AR6 starkly warns the end of conventional farms, fisheries and forests if we do not act now: 1. Energy efficiency, 100% switch from inefficient fossil fuels by 2030. 12% 2. Cut fossil extracts on emission paths 1% of today's level/month to zero by 2030. 80% 3. Drawdown like 4 new trees/person/year (2/Canadian/week in Canada). 3% 4. Ecosystem stabilization, like depaving, conservation, and restoring wetlands. 3% 5. Super-GHG reduction, like adding seaweed to feed to slow cattle methanogens, harvesting trees before they rot, controlling refrigerant and foaming gases, and ending aboveground methane processing. 2% All of that can work according to Lenton, Santer et al (2021), and doesn't require nuclear.

[@theotherandrew5540]

Two thoughts. Rapidly and progressively reduce all petroleum subsidies; and move as much as possible building construction to solid rock beams & columns. It's beautiful, stronger than concrete and less environmentally damaging.

[@aidanbay8721]

Have you heard anything about trapping carbon in soil? It’s a neat idea that only somewhat changes worldwide farming practices

[@eco-techandtravel5258]

Actually it's call regenerative agriculture and he already made video on this.

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

find a local regenerative farm and support them - it's the best tasting healthiest meat also.

[@CraigAgronomist]

Technology of carbon capture in soil is well understood. Start to learn by searching Rattan Lal Ohio State. Move onto Regenerative Agriculture & the 5 principles of Soil Health. Adoption problems are societal and macroeconomic. Policy makers provide no tax penalties to industry to amounts of carbon emissions or soil erosion losses. It appears most politicians and land managers do not believe in the correlation of increases in carbonaceous gases with higher air & water temperatures, stronger hurricanes, & drought. ####

[@sbresni]

It definitely needs more widespread attention and uptake. Along similar lines is the Pleistocene Park project that hopes to use large herds of moose, bison and reindeer to increase ground freezing in the arctic circle to reduce the increasing release of methane from the thawing tundra. www.kickstarter.com/projects/907484977/pleistocene-park-an-ice-age-ecosystem-to-save-the

[@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885]

@@sbresni Vinter is Very Long! Yes we got record snow due to Jet Stream Arctic slowing down kzbin.info/www/bejne/f4jRnYOPqpiirLM thanks - arctic-news.blogspot.com the East Siberian Arctic Shelf methane bomb is gonna keeps thing real for Mother Nature

[@skeeterpeters387]

As always, I enjoyed the video. I have experience in the construction industry in the U.S. and for the most part the contractors are pretty much unaware of the carbon footprint of their industry. Especially when there is no alternative available at all, much less at a competitive price. Most of the contractors I know and have worked with don't care much about anything else besides their kids, their mortgage, their bottom line, and their deadline. In that order. You would be hard pressed to find a contractor who has heard of or cares about carbon capture materials unless it's something available at a similar or competitive price to what's already available. Unfortunately, very few of them watch your amazing videos or follow news about climate change, green energy, etc. If you really want contractors to use a product make it available, less expensive, faster, and/or stronger. They will buy every bit of what you got. Contractors love to build and save/make money.

[@robinholmes785]

Has Tesla said anything about using green concrete in its mega-factories? Seems a perfect fit and a great way to encourage governments to faze out regular concrete. I knew that concrete was a big CO2 producer but not that Big! I didn't know that there are alternatives. Fantastic video!!

[@mrbizi5652]

I just Tweeted Elon with suggestion. Let’s see what he says :-)

[@jimlarsen6782]

Good idea. Also its phase not faze. 🎃

[@algae_rhythms]

@@mrbizi5652 any response?

[@mrbizi5652]

@@algae_rhythms sorry to say no response. I included this KZbin video but nothing yet.

[@robinholmes785]

@🌟༻🅹🅰🆈🅵🅰༺ ✓ • 5 years ago Wow! Serious trust issues. You should get that checked out. 😳🙂

[@fredericrike5974]

Your discourse on the "carbon problem" is very clear and does address much of the issue. That said, the most important comments about what we are doing and should be doing are not reinforced by how governments will need to subsidize to encourage greater and greater capture and reuse. Only large scale uses of most of the concrete products you show will ultimately (along with improved processes) make the price of "carbonated concrete products" a cost effective substitute for the limestone based stuff we use now. I am a retired construction worker and amateur student of the art and science of it- and I see much good that could be achieved- like why not replace the iron rodding used to reinforce concrete used to build tall structures? Do some research- wood limits upward building at about five stories, structural brick about 8-10, prestressed structural (reinforced with iron rodding) concrete about 12- only with steel girder sections can you go higher; if the tensile component of the pour were bundles of carbon fiber, even a small job could sequester tons of it- and the added tensile strength suggests to me that 15- maybe 20 stories might then be feasible. But iron ore and iron rebar are cheap- captured carbon products will have to achieve much to attain to get closer to a cost parity and likely tax subsidies that transfer with ownership of the building for it's a design life. I'm certainly not suggesting you are wrong- only that we, collectively, will have to take a more thorough look downstream to figure out how to make it possible at all and how to make it survivable in decades many years from now- and that, BTW, is something few modern governments do well; playing the long game is not seen as advantageous to politicians today when the upside is decades away. Some thought about how to resolve that conundrum would be worth hearing, even if it's only general suggestions.

[@nakfan]

Wow - what massive amount of information we are presented with in these videos. Thanks for giving us a bit hope and a positive drive to do something ourselves. BR, Per (DK)

[@johngillespie8229]

As we ween ourselves off of petroleum products such as gasoline and plastics made from petroleum products, we will also need a replacement for roads made from petroleum products like asphalt. This means we will be going back to making roads and parking lots out of concrete. Several benefits to concrete over asphalt is that asphalt is dark and absorbs the heat from the sun and concrete is light in color and reflects it away. Also, asphalt lasts much longer than asphalt and doesn't need to be replaced so often. And as the narrator of this KZbin video said, we can store our carbon emissions in concrete.

[@-LightningRod-]

GOOOOOOD Morning from Just have a Think, ... clicked immediately and already 500 views, ... Obviously WE are having an effect, thanks to excellent communicators like yourself.

[@peterjohnstaples]

Hi Cyril, can you please help Dave and post the scientific empirical evidence you have to prove that Man made C02 is causing harm to the environment and then I can pass it on to the climate scientists at the CSIRO in Australia so they can wipe the egg off their faces as the produced Zero for the Aust. Senate enquiry. After a twenty years search and spending $30,000,000 AUD plus expenses produced Zero evidence.

[@-LightningRod-]

@@peterjohnstaples r u helpless?

[@janami-dharmam]

You forgot to mention coke is also added in the mixture; that is the basic fuel for the furnace. The coke is also burnt off finally and the CO2 is added to the final tally. To run the furnace a blast of air is passed and that takes away all the fine particles along with the exhaust. 90% of these fines are recovered but the remaining adds to the pollution.

[@tnk4me4]

The thing that grinds my gears is that the people who would have the money and the resources to use tech that would capture carbon won't do it unless they're dragged kicking and screaming. If they don't do it in reasonable numbers then the economies of scale don't kick in to make it a mass consumer solution. This is exemplified by the oil companies turning of their carbon capture machines during this pandemic because they couldn't use the CO2 as a cost effective way to frac for more oil. It's all good to have the tech but when Certain groups lie about what they use the tech for it seems to do more harm than good.

[@PablumMcDump]

The only way to make it fair is to put a price on carbon emissions. By building the cost of remediation into the price, the capitalists can invest in low-, zero-, or negative-carbon processes. Necessity is the mother of invention. We just need to make what's necessary that which benefits humanity.

[@boudewijnpiscaer1656]

First of all, '21 is the year sustainable construction becomes mature, thanks to you people! Valuable information that deserves completions and corrections. 1. Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) is indeed 8% of global CO2, but the whole concrete economy is > 7.1 Billion tons of CO2/year (Prof. K.Sakai) which is around 17% of the global CO2. I trust Koji Sakai's study. 2. Geopolymer is part of the AAM's (Alkali Activated Materials) and innovated in the Soviet period in the Ukraïne yet kept alive by the Frenchman Davidovitz. Australia Zeobond and Wagner applied it in the market and we returned it to Europe with Prof. John Provis at our "Accelerating Sustainable Construction Materials Application Event (ASCMAE) II Feb. 23 2018. Result; more than 15 applications, including affordable structural concrete underpass for the Dutch railroads PRORAIL. 3. AAM's are part of a series of 30 CO2 reductions in concrete actions identified by the Danes and Dutch, we addressed last December in 3 ASCMAE IV webinars; 15 Green Procurement, 16 Technologies, 17 Practice. AAM's do not require big industrial investments, a reason why the OPC producers have obstructed the market implementations by outdated prescriptive regulations such as the EN 206 and 197. 4. The "whipping in the carpet" CCS is not part of these steps, though affordable CO2 supply is very welcome for several CO2 absorption and storage innovations. Carbon Capture above ground of which Hemp Crete, Cross laminated timber, Carbstone etc are parts will be facilitated by a growing number of tools. 5. In our "MANUAL of sustainable materials for CO2 neutral constructions" the section "Reducing CO2 by half, in concrete", is becoming mature with the input of the webinars. Draft 24 will be ready by the end of this month. Its time for the authorities to lead, follow or get out of our way (Gen. Patton). Local and regional public procurement are our game changers identified in our sustainable construction Eco-system. We have practical tools to leverage the needed changes. Pantheon Performance Foundation / www.sustcon.org

[@TheHowtoDad]

Thanks Dave! I Really appreciate the support!

[@MrMNRichardWright]

Excellent presentation of the potential for concrete to become a net negative on CO2. Concrete has long been criticized for it’s carbon footprint. Advancements like those presented here are transforming this vital building material.

[@peterhavord5984]

"The time is always right to do what's right." - Martin Luther King

[@lureup9973]

If we only had a political choice that reflected his thinking......

[@peterhavord5984]

@@lureup9973 The civil rights movement that Martin Luther King championed forced parties to create the political choices that reflected his thinking. Greta Thunberg is doing the same thing today

[@dororthyruth3045]

Bad science, global warming is a scam based upon falsification of the temperature record.You fools. We have had worldwide crop failures due to cold weather. During the little ice age and the normal ice ages the temperatures of the coasts increased were moderate while cold high pressure dominated the continent. We people in the center of the country that are tied to the land and agriculture know that global warming is a scam.

[@peterhavord5984]

@@dororthyruth3045 Climate skeptics simply haven't been able to produce any peer-reviewed, robust scientific studies published in high impact scientific journals to support their views. Arctic warming is modifying the pattern of Jet Stream movements increasingly delivering cold air to mid latitudes causing 'cold snaps'. As a scientist my allegiance is to robust science - not to witchcraft

[@bugs181]

​@@peterhavord5984 great point! Here's a link for @dorothy ruth on a simple SciShow video (Record Cold Winter Could Be Thanks To Global Warming) that explains this in layman's terms. kzbin.info/www/bejne/pXOsgpWglpJ1hrs

[@PádraigJMCarey]

most construction here in Australia is moving AWAY from timber frame buildings due to termites and risk of fire - we're moving fairly strongly to steel-frame construction, so I guess we need to focus CO2 reduction technologies into the steel industry as well as concrete.

[@incognitotorpedo42]

That's the next frontier. Cement is a larger CO2 producer, and I think we could do a lot with carbon capture there. We could make steel with electric furnaces and use hydrogen as a reductant. It's a dirty industry but it could be cleaned up a lot.

[@linc234]

I'm just a grunt, repairing sidewalks and curbs/gutters for my local town. And it is a shame that curing concrete emits C02, but also involved in any concrete operation are the trucks/tractors and equipment used to work on said concrete. ALL of which burn huge amounts diesel fuel in the process. Personally I'm hoping the Cybertruck will begin to change this, and I have my reservation in. Looking at it as a construction worker from a purely practical standpoint the Cybertruck is a wet dream come true.

[@nc3826]

Correction-the carbonation process of curing concrete uses (ie absorbs) carbon dioxide, it does not emit it... What produces a lot of carbon dioxide, is creating the portland cement... Check out biocement™at www.biomason.com/product/dust-control/ It's not used for sidewalks and curbs yet... But they used it to make a test runway for the USA govt.... BTW there many EV pickups coming out soon.... Even for ppl who do not have wet dreams about making Elon, richer lol and some will beat it to market..... good luck with whatever EV you buy..

[@eddydogleg]

The energy density of lithium ion batteries is pathetic. Lithium ion batteries will only ever be useful in niche markets. They will never be useful in ships, train, long haul trucking, agriculture tractors and combines, et al. For now and the foreseeable future if you need to get the job done you’re going be using fossil fuels. The Canadian company Carbon Engineering can make carbon neutral diesel so that my bet for how we stop pumping oil out of the ground.

[@jamesmay7392]

Hempcrete also captures and sequesters CO2. Have you looked into that. It sounds like the ideal building material for homes.

[@nc3826]

Hempcrete is not strong enough to replace concrete...and the lime needed to make Hempcrete has large carbon footprint

[@Stelios.Posantzis]

The construction industry uses both concrete and steel and a great amount of fuel for transporting the materials The need for concrete arises from the need for huge, tall structures: motorways, skyscrapers, condominiums etc. All of these have a single purpose: minimize the need for people to travel by enabling aggregation. Only that, thanks to the internet, many people no longer need to go to specific workplace everyday or live near their workplace: they can work remotely instead. That bring the added benefit of not having to use a means of (hydrocarbon fueled) transport. So it's the change to the way of doing business that I think will pave the way for the use of less hydrocarbons (and coal).

[@stewartsaunders1838]

Love your positive clips. And positively appreciate your truth to our ear clips. Thanks

[@thankyoutenten]

Thanks!

[@JustHaveaThink]

Thanks for your support. Much appreciated ! 😀

[@vincentanguoni8938]

I love this guy!!!! He has positive interesting info!!!

As an architect I don't think this is really going to cut it. One big problem with our constructions is we are working with materials who are not local and come from all over, combined with often the need for big machines to handle and transport them. Our challenge in construction is foremost to use locally sourced materials and reconnect to craftsmanship.

[@MinecraftGamerful]

Great video as always! Thank you so much!

[@Kevin_Street]

Thanks for another great video! So to summarize the economic angle of the video: these new carbon-dioxide intensive concrete technologies could become a market for companies that do industrial scale carbon capture, thus transforming an industry that's a net emitter of CO2 into one that reduces greenhouse gas emissions instead. It sounds like a very good idea that could make the world a significantly better place. But Geopolymer Cement has been around for decades and hasn't made any significant inroads in that time. Better alternatives already exist, but they haven't been adopted because cement producers don't want to spend the (probably massive) amount of money needed to change their machinery, and cement consumers don't want to buy something that's more expensive than the regular stuff. To get these new carbon-capturing concretes adopted, the carbon capture industries need to be properly incentivized (by governments) to sell their CO2 to the concrete manufacturers instead of to the oil companies. At least in the US. But if China is the world's largest user of concrete, what kind of incentives could lead to changing the carbon capture and concrete manufacturing industries there?

[@steelegriffiths8650]

We need good-faith negotiations between major emitters, as it seems everyone is in "I'll do it if you take the first step" mode. But that's just a pipe dream, because scapegoating China and dropping out of negotiations lets everyone continue business as usual. We need a global carbon tax negotiated.

[@Kevin_Street]

Alas, it seems like we're in an era of increased national competitiveness where there's little appetite for actually following through with negotiated emissions agreements. Europe is fairly unique in that they seem to be serious about their commitments to cut greenhouse gases. In the rest of the world (including my own country) we agree to cuts but never do much. I think any truly significant solution like green cement has to be bottom-up to work. That is, it has to be initiated by the industries themselves for cost savings reasons rather than be imposed from the top down. But you're right about the carbon tax, of course. Hopefully more and more nations will implement their own versions of that idea.

[@Tore_Lund]

Wait a minute, cement already absorbs CO2 when curing? Is the process mentioned more effective??

[@cyrilbrunner8019]

It does. When cement cures, it captures 2-30% of the CO2 released by producing the clinker (without counting the CO2 to heat the kiln). Neustark, another #carbontech startup, increases the uptake of formally produced CO2 by up to 70%.

[@carlosandleon]

@@cyrilbrunner8019 I don't understand, isn't that still carbon positive? I knew concrete was a carbon sink but I think that's misleading because they just reabsorb the C02 that they offgassed in the production process in the first place

[@gasdive]

Concrete does absorb a lot of CO2 but it's slow. These processes seem to speed up the natural process. However you can get the same result by crushing end of life concrete and storing it in the open air for a few years before disposal. I can't see these CO2 injection methods becoming widely adopted unless there's a change in reinforcing materials as carbonation makes the cement more corrosive.

[@cyrilbrunner8019]

@@carlosandleon From my understanding, it is still carbon positive. And this is where my understanding deviates from what Dave states in the video. The maximum amount of CO2 the cement can take up is what is has released during production. Maybe for clarification: during the actual traditional curing of Portland cement, almost no CO2 is taken up. Ca(OH)2 and CaO2SiO2*4 H2O- complexes are formed, which provide the strength to the cured concrete. But during the subsequent years, the cured cement takes up CO2 at the surface. Thus, the carbonation rate is a few mm/cm a year and decreases with time. And this is where the injection of pure CO2 (like what CarbonCure etc. does) helps. The only way I see cement or concrete to be net negative is when you remove CO2 during production using CCS, store the CO2 in deep porous rock formations or saline aquifers and then you apply either the method of CarbonCure etc. or use it like what is done traditionally where it takes up the 2-30% CO2 and/or do what @gasdrive stated below (grind the concrete after it's life, spread it out and let it take up CO2 for a few months).

[@rockets4kids]

The problem here is that concrete is only re-absorbing the CO2 that was driven out during production! That, in turn, is an extremely energy-intensive process which generates even more CO2!

[@JonathanLoganPDX]

Carbon neutral or carbon negative concrete by 2050? That's only 20 years too late! Great show! Thanks again for always doing a wonderful job!

[@ElectricityTaster]

Tyler Ley here on youtube is a concrete expert and has discusses the pros and cons in a much more detailed way. I felt this video did not go into the cons of this technology when applied to steel-reinforced concrete.

[@troubadourinteractiv]

One of the most hopeful discussions of a seemingly intractable problem I've yet heard. In this and so many other cases, the real difficulty we face is not one of technological complexity but political will.

[@devinfaux6987]

Incentives require political will, and fossil fuel interests will fight them tooth and nail.

[@PinataOblongata]

That's why voters need to be informed, and that's why we're doomed.

[@nathanlevesque7812]

@star cruiser no, you just don't know how to fact check

[@nathanlevesque7812]

@star cruiser Ideal for what? Our species? Pre-industrial levels are better. Reducing carbon emissions, increasing carbon sequestration (e.g habitat restoration or carbon capture) is the only way short of a geoengineering shortcut (but that's probably just a pipedream). Also, how does one fact check a question? You are very random.

[@steelegriffiths8650]

@star cruiser Most pointless contribution to the KZbin comment section ever - congratulations. Go back to lobbying for cigarettes and asbestos.

[@nathanlevesque7812]

@star cruiser Just above where plants die? That honestly made me laugh. What's your source? Also, the oldest carbon tax is from 1990, and cap and trade goes back to the 80s, whereas the science of global warming is well over a hundred years old at this point. So in your mind scientists worked all over the world independently from another to lay the foundation for a hoax whose purpose they couldn't even conceive of, and would never profit from. You have a very elaborate form of motivated stupidity.

[@jdavidmeigh]

s a civil engineer working on climate resilience projects this is an interest of mine. What I think is missed out of the video is to capture the CO2 produced in cement making and pass through a new process that makes carbon nanotubes and carbon fiber. This allows steel rods to be replaced in reinforced concrete with carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) rods and mesh to produce stronger members. It is also possible to use carbon fiber as permanent formwork, producing slimmer and more flexible members that are more earthquake-resilient and can be used to strengthen column/beam joints in both new designs and strengthening of weak structures. The problem at the moment is that steel is a relatively cheap material as its carbon footprint is not reflected in the financial price which is often subsidised. Another option is to blow the cooled gas through greenhouses with plants that respond quickly to increased CO2 levels. One plant of recent interest and resurgence is industrial hemp that makes a variety of products. One of these is hempcrete, a mixture of hemp straw, sand and lime that has good insulating properties for use in walls and floors.

[@roycavitt4544]

I saw NASA maps of CO2, that showed the CO2 decrease durring a day as the corn crop in the USA grew. It implied that the crop had enough sunlight to grow more if there was more CO2 for it to grow.

[@Ruudjee]

Is up to the governments around the world to use carbon recycled materials and apply in to the laws. This will develop these techniques faster and cheaper.

[@toddkorson6390]

Government has its place, it’s the market that will make the difference.

[@Ruudjee]

@@toddkorson6390 Agree but the market act on government laws.

[@gamingtonight1526]

We will reach the 1.5C rise before anything has an impact. So I hope we can turn it around somewhat before it goes over a 2.0C rise! My worry is that we are always hearing how the "process" needs to be made cheap enough to compete". This can take a decade, so what's needed for many of these inventions, is corporations need to be told to use them when they are within 10% of the regular price, with the 10% being able to be passed on. This would mean these inventions could be used years earlier.

[@peterjohnstaples]

"Oh" this program is for the brainwashed to gather around and rub the hands together which will be their only new form of heating.

[@andrewcheadle948]

How much warming would you say has naturally occurred from us coming out of the little ice age? And how much is from co2 going from 0.0280% pre industrial revolution to 0.0415% currently.?

[@skyebarkschat]

Thank you for ths video!!

[@TheDavemarz]

I would love it if he could add a bit at the end of each video about what we, the average person, can do to help move some of this great technology along.

[@garrygballard8914]

Thank you for this. It’s important for us all today to be more aware of these technologies.

[@teamfusion7218]

You can further decrease Carbon Dioxide when using concrete by utilising a Bubbledeck technique. Worth looking at if you are interested. Amazed very few companies take this on, it is an exceptional. An you did mention Aerated concrete, which is essentially this, but the use of reinforced recycled plastic balls removes the amount of concrete used. (Great video, well done)

[@h_h03]

Carbon is good for the earth, you're like Mr freeze from Batman.

[@craglevcarboncapture]

I've always been a big fan of doing something useful with carbon captured. The "let's just shove it all in the ground" aspect of most carbon capture methods seems unnecessary when there are a lot of useful things you can make with it (besides synfuel which will release more CO2 over its life cycle anyway). There are uses for it other than concrete as well. I make climbing chalk with captured carbon and I know of a company in Canada that makes soap with it.

[@ch94086]

Storing 15kg in a cubic meter of concrete, 2400kg, seems inconsequential, especially if 2400kg CO2 released to make that cubic meter.

[@artiomvas]

Exactly what I thought as he said that. The CO2 produced for the manufacture of structural concrete (using ~14% cement) is estimated at 410 kg/m3. CarbonCure claims their method captures 15-23 kg of CO2 per m3 of structural concrete. That is just a 3.6-5.6% reduction.

[@gasdive]

Concrete absorbs much more than that naturally.

[@timbushell8640]

@Lamazi 1952 because the Joneses have 10,000... ... : ((((

[@xDanoss318x]

Regenerative agriculture (done right) can capture all human caused emissions and store it in soils. Its another piece to the puzzle. I‘m confident that if we combine different solutions we can get this done together as a species.

[@WhatWhy42]

Take 2or3 if these ideas and put it together and we have a winner

[@imgayasheck595]

Yeah is this possible? The problem with competition is we lose all the cooperation and have to keep reinventing the wheel and working around nonsense like patents

[@wlhgmk]

Better still, replace as much concrete construction as possible with the use of engineered wood. Plant plantations of wood for this purpose and replant every time they are harvested. The buildings themselves, if of good quality, sequester carbon for relatively long periods. Take all the waste wood from the whole process from forest all the way to construction and pyrolize it. This produces cooking gas, petroleum, air craft fuel and tar and the by product is charcoal. Incorporate the charcoal into agricultural soils where it greatly improves the soil and remains for a very long time, sequestering even more carbon. The whole process actually removes net carbon from the atmosphere. The cherry on the top is that wood multi-story buildings are very earthquake resistant.

[@Wookey.]

Yep. Everything up to 5 stories should be CLT or timber frame+woodfibre insulation. Highly carbon-negative buildings. You can go higher (18 storeys is current (2019) record) but go high enough and we are back to steel and/or concrete.

[@StormGod29]

@@Wookey. Based on what I've read, densified wood could dramatically increase that breakpoint. Oddly, so far there seem to be virtually no commercial offerings. Scaling shouldn't be an issue so it must be economics. Still an interesting technology to add to the mix.

[@jonasrosengren9093]

I'm now a patreon

[@JustHaveaThink]

YAY :-)

[@drpk6514]

I think it was over 15 years ago I read on the newspaper (good old days) that a Canadian firm developed a kind of concrete which absorbs CO2 from the atmosphere throughout its life time. They claimed if their technology was used everywhere then the problem with CO2 would be solved. It is fascinating that concrete alone produces almost as much CO2 (8%) as agriculture (9%). I believe one of the easiest ways that can reduce the CO2 in the air is by adding chemicals such as iron or wastes such as ash from burning coal (not sure if the heavy-metals could be separated) to the ocean desert area and let the plankton do their job. This way the carbon will go back where they came from, in the bottom of the oceans. Also might result in more see food...

[@drpk6514]

@@Jay...777 Watch the video at 4:10

[@PJBentley]

@@Jay...777 Debunked? It’s by know means a sure thing, but replicating the process with volcanic ash is still being researched and is very much on the table as a possible solution: www.chemistryworld.com/news/seeding-oceans-with-volcanic-ash-could-be-new-tool-to-tackle-climate-change/4012523.article

[@gregwarner3753]

Plant HEMP. Lots and lots of HEMP. Use the HEMP to build things. Lots of CO2 sequestered.

[@0dyss3us51]

Actually true

[@GlobeHackers]

I've watched the carbon capture space for over a decade. What we need to do is figure out how to establish new cultural values. There are no technological magic bullets for a pathological global economic system. Until there are different values at the core of our culture, we will be playing the game of financializing every potential "fix" until it's absolutely too late. Still, the what-if imagine that exercise is important, and everyone's efforts are needed and appreciated. We are simply not interested in understanding complex systems. How could we make the project of saving habitat for life emotionally satisfying? How might we define prosperity in a way that puts us on a path towards a sustainable global economy? In our profits first consumer culture, we will never understand the power of wisdom. Unfortunately, most of us are lazy debt and circuses addicts. Today, most people are marching for the chance to hang out in a crowded bar again.

[@Jon_Godfrey]

Interestingly the Romans had a solution. Lime absorbs CO2 as it calcifies. It’s not 100% of CO2 given off when made but it’s significant.

[@rfldss89]

That's also happening with modern concrete (the basic composition of both mixtures is the same). It binds with the co2 in the air, to form calcium carbonate. That's how portland cement cures and solidifies.

[@alexanderx33]

3:45 Its 0.55 tonnes of CO2 per 1.0 tonne of portland cement according to that equation. Not 1 to 1. If you didn't say that there was MORE co2 from the coal burning then it might have been correct but the reaction itself doesn't produce the same masses of Portland cement and CO2. The stoichimetric ratio is 1:1 but this is number of molecules, not mass.

[@gm2407]

make it a law that only green cement can be used then watch the prices fall.

[@ahaveland]

Good luck with that!

[@gm2407]

@@ahaveland It will eventually happen it's only matter of time as to when it happens. Same with all the other initiatives, we are behind the curve at every step.

[@mpdavis731]

If only that could be passed - probably wouldn't even make it out of committee, and even if it did, would never be voted in by any group of legislators outside of the green party. It all goes back to politics, unfortunately.

[@ahaveland]

@@gm2407 Eventually, but I think it'll be more likely that the industry will have to offset their emissions. Concrete is too useful to give up, though there are many kinds for different uses. A carbon fee can help tip the balance to greener alternatives where appropriate, but it'll be difficult to get through because of politics.

[@gm2407]

@@ahaveland Only so many offsets can be done, in the end you have to committ to the path of low carbon. Lots of work to be done and no committment on farming and construction measurers, 30 years of car emission focus and non on these other things and chemical industry.

[@artmonkey4047]

Here in Mexico and the rest of Latin America. Cinder blocks are the number one material in construction. Yet no word on green block down here.

[@anders21karlsson]

They should reuse concrete from demolished buildings more than today. They should use hydrogen instead of coal and build more with wood than today.

[@davidkendall2272]

Excellent and worthwhile information, sorely needed. Thanks for doing this!

[@offgridwanabe]

Precast is being used more every day in the construction industry we even have precast bridges now that go together like giant lego blocks so the carbon capture is the next step but competition for supply of precast needs some help

[@catandtheostrich]

Concrete as we know is a blend of cement, sand, etc. I wonder if we should try using ground up granite, like olivine that has been proposed for advanced weathering?

[@TheMrCougarful]

These proposed carbon-capture "solutions" terrify me. Almost none of them propose capture over geological time scales, which is the actual requirement. Most of them require their own energy inputs that currently can only be met with even more fossil fuel consumption. A few of the solutions propose that the captured carbon be used to create liquid fuels, meaning the "capture" part is intended to be immediately reverted. And in all cases, the solutions are either experimental, theoretical, hard to scale globally, or require policy initiatives and global governance that are laughable in the current political climate. In the end, carbon-capture schemes look to me like an excuse to just go on like we are with the promise that someone will come along at a later date and clean up our mess for us. Which please note is how Capitalism usually does things, to obvious effect. Our ONLY solution at this late date is to leave fossil fuel resources in the ground, and if doing that causes a problem then we'll just have to deal with the problem. And yes I understand that one of the problems might be the end of global industrialized civilization and the resulting death of billions. But given the alternative of rendering the planet inhospitable to life as we know it, the choice still seems clear. We've been playing fast and loose with the laws of physics, changing the Earth's global dynamic system without even understanding how it works, and now suddenly it appears the party is over. If we are going to act like adults, then we need to accept the resulting challenges so created and go forward doing the best we can. But will we do that? With these proposed get-out-of-jail-free techno-utopian solutions being floated, I rather doubt we will make any changes at all.

[@robmcilroy1894]

Yep. I would add that humans do this,regardless of the ideology, laying it at the feet of capitalism is naive. We love our cognitive dissonance. It means we don't have to consider the consequences of our actions.

[@Froggability]

Yes and encourages the likes of these nauseating "rose colored glasses" videos to be produced.. With pipe dreams technology is racing to save the world with some magical solutions

[@DataJuggler]

I have day dreamed about this since I was a child. I think mass produced algae could replace our use of petroleum for plastics, steel and energy. Refined properly it could make steel that is lighter and stronger than our current titanium. I know some companies are doing research on algae, however if my sci-fi induced physics knowledge combined with spidey sense is correct, algae reproduces and creates energy instead of being burned to create energy. I just need a few billion dollars and 200,000 acres of unused property.

[@Velacreations]

Soil has the largest potential for a massive carbon sink that can be scaled rapidly

[@TerrellMethvin]

Soil is dead plants, right? So more plants, done.

[@Velacreations]

@@TerrellMethvin no, it's not just dead plants. It's a living ecosystem of microorganisms. Dead plants are but one food source for soil.

[@TerrellMethvin]

@@Velacreations agreed it is an ecco system. There is a lot of poop and everything that dies.

[@peterbrickwood3204]

Money. Corporations and the people that run them are motivated by money and the power it brings. I believe our best hope of reversing global warming is to find ways that corporations can make money out of solutions. This looks like a good option.

[@ApexStreet]

the energy to capture co2 is an issue

[@SangoProductions213]

Entropy? What's that? Does it taste good?

[@leechurchill1965]

@Kate Wolf Former vegetarian here. Yeah. I'm not making the connection between meat eating and carbon footprint. But carnivory does put humans a bit higher on the food chain, which may strain our resources a bit more. But yeah, monoculture farming basically rapes the land.

[@randallparr4349]

I have one of these old style CaCO2 plants near me. My late uncle worked there. Big quarry. Nice catch.

[@budders9958]

Eventually that concrete will break down and the carbon will go back into the atmosphere. This is the same reason why planting trees is not a valid solution either. The trees will eventually die, decompose and release the carbon back into the atmosphere. The fact is that we dug up and are still digging up millions of years worth of natural organic matter that was through time and pressure converted into the highly complex molecules we call oil, nautral gas, coal etc. And the only solution, forgoing some major advance in producing energy to split the CO2 module into Carbon and Oxygen is to put the byproduct back where it came from, underground.

[@binmanblog]

You right in what you say but this is about working with industry to reduce CO2 while the human race gets its shit together. Timber frames will lock up today's carbon for centuries as will this new concrete. It will help to reduce CO2 in the short term.

[@CraftyF0X]

@@binmanblog It's not like we used the time wisely till this point. The fear is somewhat valid, the technology is great, but don't let the fossil fuel industry greenwash itself with the excuse of carbon capture. If we ever let them off the hook we better make sure that the co2 they claimed to got rid off indeed remains out of the atmosphere, either by continously recycleing these materials (so the carbon remains locked up) or by figuring out different permanent solutions before these gets to the end of their lifecycle.

[@DerNutzer8]

Depends on how you approach planting trees. Regrowing old forests with proper soil and mixed trees (not like modern plantations with industrialised harvesting) also locks up CO2 in the soil and just because trees decompose does not mean new trees would not grow. It has also wider implications in capturing particles and recreational areas. There is more to it than meets the eye. Also, planting trees to save the world and then creating humongous mono-cultures kinda defeats the purpose. Same as the Brits using wood chips to burn in lieu of coal just to import wood and cause deforestation in the US. I forgot that natural forest may also improve erosion, ground water supply and much more. It is not just "locking up" some CO2 and forgetting about it. But the law of unintended consequences may strike if not heeded...

[@budders9958]

​@@DerNutzer8 As the video points out, we need "net negative" carbon reduction by 2050 to achieve the goal. The sort of reduction rates they are aiming to achieve will never happen using natural processes because the situation was created using un-natural processes. The situation was created using industrial scale process' and therefore it's going to take industrial scale processes to fix it. The trick is how to get the same scale of energy input to drive those industrial processes in the opposite direction.

[@DerNutzer8]

@@budders9958 I disagree in the sense that forest are not providing net carbon reduction, especially when improving soil quality and avoiding mass harvesting and mono-cultures. This can create a carbon sink with positive effects surrounding the mere carbon-sink goal. It is not the sole solution, never advertised it as that. But it not only locks up tons upon tons during growth, but also more than it will eventually release - given sustainable management and not just plant industrially used trees like a farm. These forest management are also not natural if we plant them on a big scale, reducing the damage done over centuries by cutting forests down. Carbon reduction is a multi-facetted strategy and transitioning towards capture and use oil as is, it is a but a piece in the puzzle.

[@Elwin3918]

Instead of carbon capturing in the soil, storing it or channeling it to concrete manufacturing may be a greener alternative .hydrogen fuel production may be made greener with the use methane by having the concrete manufacturer use the co2 for this new greener process.👍🏾

[@lorenzoventura7701]

Beware the hydrogen, sir. Hydrogen is more corrosive and more explosive than methane. Hydrogen combustion emits water vapour and nitrogen oxides which increase the greenhouse effect. Methane pipelines leakage is a relevant source of ghg.

[@incognitotorpedo42]

@@lorenzoventura7701 Why do you think hydrogen is corrosive? Hydrogen combustion can be done in ways that don't create NOx, and water vapor does not increase the greenhouse effect. Water is a greenhouse gas, but its percentage in air is fixed at a given temperature. Generating water vapor doesn't change the amount of water in the air; it will just condense out as liquid water. You might see some local increase in water content if the air is dry, but the overall amount of water in the entire atmosphere is essentially fixed.

[@lorenzoventura7701]

@@incognitotorpedo42 Ignore the water vapour thing then, even though I'm not sure I'm totally with you about it. NOx forms whenever there's a high temperature, is a relevant ghg and is also harmful when breathed. Hydrogen dissolves in the iron lattice and bonds with carbon forming methane blisters and locally depleting the steel alloy of carbon, reducing the tensile strength. Not to mention current methane pipe are not compliant to exercise pressure required for hydrogen. Current pipes simply must be replaced, so my point is: who pays and where's the benefit for an additional energy vector which is more dangerous and less efficient than electricity?

[@incognitotorpedo42]

@@lorenzoventura7701 Yes, hydrogen embrittlement is a thing. NOx forms in high temperature combustion, particularly at high pressure as in an internal combustion engine. I don't think it's that much of a problem at low pressure though.

[@scifrygaming]

The way you presented CO2 storage under EOR operations is not entirely correct. Roughly 30%-40% of the CO2 used for EOR is 'lost' or sequestered in the oil field. It's not enough to offset the resulting CO2 emissions downstream, but they are storing a large amount of CO2, millions of tons over the field's lifetime. They only get the 45Q tax credit for the CO2 that is sequestered, not what is injected in the field. Geologic storage is the only way to remove large enough quantities of CO2 (Billions of tons/year) permanently to make a meaningful impact on our current situation. That is going to be in EOR operations, abandoned oil and gas fields, and most importantly, in deep saline aquifers. Efficiencies, fuel switching, renewables, and novel techniques like storing CO2 in concrete will help, but we must start capturing CO2 at an industrial scale using existing technologies and sequestering it in the subsurface. We have no choice anymore. That time passed 20 years ago.

[@robertsteyn6516]

Could you look into how much it would cost us if we paid rain forest countries to plant new forest, instead of burning current forest to up the worlds carbon capture. Thank you for a great channel.

[@Knowledge_Nuggies]

Could you make a video about serial building renovation, e.g. like Ecoworks' approach?

[@RIPPEDDRAGON40k]

11:03 The same sequestration logic can be applied to creating transportation fuels. We could easily pump it back underground and store it for later use or sequester it permanently. On top of that I don't see battery technology getting to high enough densities to power commercial airlines anytime soon. So your only 2 options are hydrocarbon fuels created from sequestered carbon or pure hydrogen which requires much larger fuel tanks or decreased range.

[@tonydeveyra4611]

You should do an episode on hempcrete.

[@JustHaveaThink]

It's coming :-)

[@A-a-ron666]

There was an Australian company making Portland cement by pumping coal plant emissions through a mist of sea water. Don't remember the company but they were very promising due to the simplicity.

[@drewdegen9043]

Carbon-cure concrete's impact scale and useful versatility is one of the few technological "fixes" for climate change that seems genuinely hopeful in dealing directly with carbon dioxide emissions without promotional overreach.

[@steverichmond7142]

A number of scientists came to the conclusion the only way to lower carbon in construction is to ban concrete, bricks, etc. Concrete is a greater polluter than oil. There are alternative construction techniques (e.g. SIPs) that are cheaper, contain little or no carbon and are more thermally efficient. We could easily get rid of concrete in infrastructure using 'crush and bind' techniques. These technologies have been around since the 1960s and use little or no carbon in their production; are available now and are also considerably cheaper to produce.

[@mcspaddencw]

I appreciate your channel. I think often you advocate the extreme solutions that will not likely be embraced immediately. The more technology is developed that will make it cost effective to change business as usual the better. I know that massive change is necessary but there are so many really intelligent people I know that have not awoken to the problem. And in fact when they do awaken they will likely feel paralyzed by the hopelessness of it all. All this to say the only way to effect real change is to make it cheaper to do better.

[@hansjorgkunde3772]

As the graph shows, the increase in CO2 happen mainly in China and India. How exactly will you force them?

[@mcspaddencw]

@@hansjorgkunde3772 I'm not sure u understand you question. I was saying finding technology that makes it proffitable to do the right thing. If the side effects of pulling carbon out of the air, commercial grade CO2 can be sold to make a better building material cheaper than what is produced and sold now no one gets "Forced". The market will do the "Forcing" via price

[@hansjorgkunde3772]

@@mcspaddencw Actually would preventing CO2 emissions be the better way ? I don't think pulling CO2 from the atmosphere will ever be profitable. So most likely it will be subsidized... Forcing via price, yes i got you and i don't like that part. Germany rises taxes on heating oil and gas 8%. But there is no real alternative offered to compensate that. Meanwhile 75% of all emissions are produced by the Industry and others, and they get even lower prices if they consume more energy...

[@eh240zed]

Some good information, but missing something key. I also was intrigued by the sequestration potential of CO2 in concrete, so I dod some due diligence. On further investigation I learned that there is actually very little CO2 sequestered in the process. The large CO2 savings that is realized is because the carbon cured CO2 is stronger so less is needed. The reduced amount of cement required means that less CO2 from the cement process is released for a given building's concrete requirements.

[@acmefixer1]

The cement plant here in California puts used tires into the kiln to reduce the amount of energy used.