New compound developed by UC Berkeley scientists can remove CO2 from air

[@andrew.nicholson]

🤦‍♂️ there are too many unanswered questions here. Removes as much CO2 as a tree… in what timeframe? Per day, week, in its lifetime? How clean is the process of creating it? How do you react the air with it, and how much energy does that take? How do you process it to use it again? How much energy does that take? I want it to work as much as anyone, but these are big claims with little information given to back them up.

[@worstusername22]

Sensationalism.

[@mikeharrington5593]

Is the yellow stuff fairy dust??

[@KurtZoglmann]

How many joules of energy does it take to remove 1 kg of CO2? This is probably the most important and unanswered question. The answer will likely determine whether it can and will be scaled up to industrial levels.

[@john15008]

Let’s remain optimistic nonetheless. Some form of atmospheric engineering will be required. All good ideas start with these preliminary discoveries.

[@juancena1117]

Go look at the study yourself

[@justanghozzst8218]

Scientist:We have an amazing breakthrough! KZbin comments: Thats stupid!

[@stoneageart9965]

yer who need plants !!!

[@JayFaulk-q3f]

KZbin scientists

[@thebudman1980]

It's impractical because the scale needed. The world isn't going to all come together and do the same thing in any meaningful scale that is required and this would need to be millions of times that amount and all over the world and includes in most of the sky.

[@stoneageart9965]

@@thebudman1980 We could just plant more tree's . I heard tell they suck up carbon like ahhh trees. Jokes aside google "greening desert" Mom has things in hand.

[@lomuscko]

The energy cost of doing this is high and will imply in more CO2.

[@AngelaLopez-j5p]

This guy and the young fellow cleaning the ocean project are something to praise. These individuals are actually creating something worthy and exciting. Great job we need more of these kind to start a new generation ❤

[@SCORPIUSANCTUM]

agreed! and why isnt this good news going viral vs all the doomsday stuff?!

[@outofsightoutofmind697]

Because it's stupid. Trees have been doing this since the earth was formed... here is a better idea... let's just plant more trees!? Another fun fact: we are coming out of an ice age. It's not global warming it global returning to climate. 3.2% of the ozone is co2... plants thrive at 7.4%. Humans only contribute to 0.14% of the co2. We can not stop nature. Antarctica was not originally covered in ice and had people living there. Look up Columbus original map of Antarctica. Let that sink in.

[@sarahw.3738]

Quit cutting down the trees

[@nh251]

I'm working on building businesses so I can one day start mass producing hemp fiber products like 2x4s and sheets of osb for subflooring and structural materials. Hemp can make better boards than trees, cheaper and more efficiently. I'm legitimately trying to bring down the majority of the timber industry, I just need more money, or funding. I'm only 38 though, so I'm in my prime as a business owner with this goal in mind. I will get it done. I will bring down the timber industry. If you know any investors with a lot of money that wants to get behind that, send them my way lol I need partners.

[@dagwort]

But I need TP! TP for my bungholio!

[@Idontcare-g1n]

Quit asking for affordable housing then

[@morsemurraidh1314]

_Quit _*_burning_*_ the trees._

[@nh251]

@@morsemurraidh1314 But I love weed

[@mikeharrington5593]

In perspective: What is the residue of this process & how can it be disposed of on a scale of billions of tons?

[@MarSchlosser]

All it takes is all your money every day for 50 years. All we need are something the geniuses never thought about. Trees. Cover crops. More.

[@anotherguy9402]

Quit being sheeple soda lime absorbs twice as much co2 as this product does and only has to be mined 😂

[@km-bo3zx]

Some how this reminds me of all the break throughs that have made news to take care of our plastic problem. They were all promoted by the plastic industry, to make it sound like there was a solution imminent, when in fact we are buried in plastic…..

[@MarSchlosser]

What plastic problam? The fairy tales they spread to make wealth off of the taxpayer? Every scrap of plastic can be converted back to oil and used. the Navy refused to put drags and converters onboard ships because there's so little; bacteria feed on it almost as fast as it comes from 3rd world rivers.

[@ogadlogadl490]

Excellent comment, we’ve been hearing about plastic alternatives for at least a decade, nothing has really come of it.

[@km-bo3zx]

@@ogadlogadl490 And, don’t even get me started on the myth of plastic recycling! Another fallacy that was pushed by the industry. Less than 9% is actually recycled and 85% goes into landfills…..

[@Croakin]

We have solutions to fix plastic now, it needs scaled up. But theres several projects cleaning plastics from the ocean that are currently showing promise. We've also genetically modified bugs to digest plastic too.

[@km-bo3zx]

@@Croakin Until we see it, it’s just propaganda from the plastics industry.

[@intheshell35ify]

They call it "tree".

[@MarSchlosser]

California did, then lost water rights and the trees had to be cut down to save more water for Hollywood swimming pools.

[@morsemurraidh1314]

Well, no, they called it a "yellow powder," but this ought to be another tool in the box _that also contains trees._

[@castorchange9737]

​@@morsemurraidh1314no I call it plastic trees or tree plastic lol

[@whatabouttheearth]

🤦 There are not enough plants to do the proper amount of carbon uptake, and as a carbon reservoir land plants are little compared to the ocean (where over 50% of oxygen is "created" by phytoplankton, mainly diatoms) and lithosphere. You can't simply pump CO2 into a plant and expect it to do more photosythesis because there are other limiting factors. It's like have 10,000 steering wheels on an assembly line and thinking you can make 10,000 cars, but you only have 400 wheels, 100 starters, and 100 transmissions. For instance, in order to activate the first photosystem of the light dependent reactions (Photosystem 2) in photosythesis you need a certain amount of photons and a certain amount of H2O for the OEC (Oxygen Evolving Complex) to rip off electrons from H2O four times to then reject two 02 (oxygen) and use the remaining electrons of the hydrogen to continue the process in the next photosystem (photosystem 1). And CO2 doesn't come into the equation until the light independent reactions. You can pump in more CO2 and produce more plant biomass but there is a limit because the chloroplasts can only take in so much, and they can also take in so much of the other limiting factors such as photons and H2O that ALSO power the process. I suggest checking out the photosythesis section on my photosythesis playlist, especially the video on the channel 'clockwork', or just look up "Glorious Clockwork Photosythesis". Also look up Mel Strongs video on climate change in his playlist for his meteorology/atmospheric science course.

[@whatabouttheearth]

🤦 There are not enough plants to do the proper amount of carbon uptake, and as a carbon reservoir land plants are little compared to the ocean (where over 50% of oxygen is "created" by phytoplankton, mainly diatoms) and lithosphere. You can't simply pump CO2 into a plant and expect it to do more photosythesis because there are other limiting factors. It's like have 10,000 steering wheels on an assembly line and thinking you can make 10,000 cars, but you only have 400 wheels, 100 starters, and 100 transmissions. For instance, in order to activate the first photosystem of the light dependent reactions (Photosystem 2) in photosythesis you need a certain amount of photons and a certain amount of H2O for the OEC (Oxygen Evolving Complex) to rip off electrons from H2O four times to then reject two 02 (oxygen) and use the remaining electrons of the hydrogen to continue the process in the next photosystem (photosystem 1). And CO2 doesn't come into the equation until the light independent reactions. You can pump in more CO2 and produce more plant biomass but there is a limit because the chloroplasts can only take in so much, and they can also take in so much of the other limiting factors such as photons and H2O that ALSO power the process. I suggest checking out the photosythesis section on my photosythesis playlist, especially the video on the channel 'clockwork', or just look up "Glorious Clockwork Photosythesis". Also look up Mel Strongs video on climate change in his playlist for his meteorology/atmospheric science course.

[@CaseyDarwin]

This comments section is straight outta Idiocracy

[@UnclePlaysBadly]

God, no kidding.

[@PhilipX2030]

It is like idiot Whack-a-mole.. but look, they keep breeding.. this is why I'm working to gamify the installation of Clean Energy systems so the Smart ones will be able to cash in and multiply their projects.

[@roseanneroseannadanna9651]

Right? Look at all the biologist with their you tube degrees!

[@prophecyrat2965]

The idiocarcy are fools who belive this industiral empire will ever be sustainable. The Planet is an Ecosystem, we need this ecosystem, 4.6 billion years in the making. There is no man made subsitite to this, that wont do further harm tham good. Civilized minds are slaves to machines lile good dogs. Domesticated, loyal, and ready to die for thier metal master.

[@Nostradhomas]

Its so bad in there

[@TheTanman412]

Forget climate, at very least, a small container could prevent CO2 build up in cars, submarines, trains, close quarters, fire gas masks , disaster scenarios where outside air circulation isn’t available. Could be added to air purifiers and/or hvac/heat pump systems. Amazing!

[@phishmi1]

It doesn't create oxygen. You'd still deplete that in a sealed space if used.

[@The_Savage_Wombat]

@@phishmi1 Yes, but CO2 becomes toxic long before the O2 is depleted.

[@mrschnider6521]

we need co2 for our crops and forests...

[@TheJevardo]

@@mrschnider6521yes but there’s currently so much that it’s destroying the planet including forests and farms, are you paying attention?

[@PhilipX2030]

​@@mrschnider6521you're just determined to be stupid. I'm sorry, you should know by now that these are fossil fuel corporation talking points. We have too much CO2 in the atmosphere, causing global warming which is about to get very extreme, very horrible. The ice caps are melting.. the floods are coming happening and will be even greater after you die, but this is the time to stop the CO2. Are you getting the picture? And literally no one around you has said anything about this because you're in a red state ? Knowledge should not be political

[@Mt-ue9qz]

What is left over and how is that dealt with?

[@beegeealop7567]

The yellow substance will be marketed as a new flavor of Doritos.

[@theonetruemorty4078]

@@beegeealop7567 Doritos Carbon Crunch

[@beberivera7011]

Underrated comment😂😂😂​@@theonetruemorty4078

[@analogecstasy4654]

What’s left over? Air with no carbon in it! This substance could be incorporated into a filtration unit-then we could add them to virtually every HVAC system in America. Over time it would filter out an incredible amount of carbon. What did you think they were gonna do? Dump it over the ocean??

[@PhilipX2030]

​@@analogecstasy4654 put it on sidewalks, rooftops, roadways... Front and back of the fan blades and wind turbines... How about on the underside of solar panels Okay, how do you remove the CO2 from this powder compound? This will help prove the utility

[@benstone5650]

We already have that! It’s called photosynthesis. All green plants use it.

[@BillyL]

1 vile = a full grown tree... thats impressive

[@benstone5650]

@@BillyL what do they do with it when it’s full? One vile equals one full tree? For what duration? Some trees live 100’s of years. Does the vile last an equal amount?

[@BillyL]

@benstone5650 hell if I know, I watched the same video you did. Science can create but also solve lots of problems

[@kingmonde]

​@BillyL why is that guy so negative? Hope this guy wins a Nobel

[@lilithyolanda9851]

@@benstone5650how abt do your own research instead of complaining & acting like you already know the outcome 🤗

[@PolyThumper]

Nice work young man! We need every tool we can muster.

[@MichaelMerritt]

And even tools that look like musterd!

[@NJSins8shn]

I didn't see anything mentioned about how much energy it takes to create this magical powder

[@RedbeardJack]

People thinking trees are the answer: The ocean: someone please clean me. I make your oxygen.

[@gort5583]

Yep and also as stated above at 180ppm plants and algae dies so I don't rea;;y think these idiots should be frigging around with some magic CO2 absorber. Sounds like that is what they intend to do though.

[@mjt1517]

Trees also make oxygen.

[@RedbeardJack]

@@mjt1517 yes, but they primarily clean the oxygen, scrubbing it of Co2 and releasing it so we can breathe it. But most of that, almost 70% comes from the oceans.

[@SnailMan63]

That’s true. Water covers 71% of the earths surface. That’s WAYYYYY more surface area for marine plants to take hold and convert CO2 into oxygen than land where humans will continue to clear for development. Also I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s easier to convert dissolved CO2 than gaseous phase because all life originated in the oceans.

[@Newgodlove]

@@RedbeardJack the ocean is earth oxygen

[@Soooooooooooonicable]

What's with all the weirdly confrontational comments about trees?? Why are you people being dishonest? The issue is that we have TOO much carbon in the air. The point is to get the carbon levels down to pre-industrial level. The trees will be fine : \

[@est8793]

That is psychotically delusional

[@LyricsQuest]

The Jurassic Period had CO2 levels 7 times higher, and the earth has been slowly stowing CO2 away in the form of coal, natural gas and oil, causing CO2 levels to decline ever since. This has been causing the earth to cool down over time, resulting in the periodic ice age that the dinosaurs /never/ saw. And they had far more abundant plant life. "Too much" is very open to debate. I say, there's too little.

[@yancgc5098]

@@LyricsQuest CO2 being 7 times higher was from the Triassic period, the Jurassic climate was actually in a state of cooling down and CO2 levels dropped way below 1,000 ppm until the beginning of the Cretaceous where it started going back up to around 1,600 ppm.

[@thomasjgour4678]

That is incorrect, we do not have too much carbon in the air at all, this is all loser liberals looking to scam taxpayer money

[@antster7]

Protect this man at all cost

[@xchopp]

From who, what?

[@anotherguy9402]

Antster your such a sheeple 😂 Soda lime absorbs twice as much co2 as this product does

[@deathtouchltd]

@@xchoppThe government. Do you not know about the scientists that disappear or are murdered?

[@SophieJjishuaa]

specswriter AI fixes this. New compound removes CO2 air.

[@tillettman]

So the carbon goes into the powder, and then what do you do with the powder? How do you stop it from being released back into the atmosphere with time? How much energy (fossil fuels) does it take to create that compound?

[@reddragonflyxx657]

If it's Direct Air Carbon Capture and Sequestration technology, it probably doesn't beat existing methods (which are expensive, even if they aren't necessarily carbon intensive processes), otherwise that would probably be in the video. CO2 scrubbers are useful for other purposes though, which might explain why it was being tested on gases other than air.

[@benstone5650]

@@tillettman I asked the same type of question above. It’s amazing the response that I got back from people who the DOE influenced, that can’t understand elementary school science.

[@NearlyAsleep]

after the carbon is in the powder they burn it with the rest of the trash

[@BlueCollaredGrit]

I can give that powder to some dudes down the street. They love all sorts of powder. We can make some money actually 😂

[@benstone5650]

@ thereby making more carbon???? You’re fully asleep.

[@YeTao-i4v]

What is the energy expenditure for running the capture-release cycle on a per-mole CO2 basis? How does it compare with amine liquid based and other existing capture processes ?

[@edmer68]

I'm surprised so many experts in meteorology and the atmosphere could fit in the comment section.🙄 This is good news and I hope it develops into something that helps with the climate crisis.

[@stoneageart9965]

Too right who need plants

[@ginaslifetoo]

​@@stoneageart9965😅😂

[@glennerd3125]

Whats the carbon footprint to manufacture this product? Betting its equal to the amount it can remove.....

[@askani21]

You're betting with zero information? Wow you must be super smart.

[@patrickp8315]

What a negative way of thinking. If the scientists are smart enough to develop this compound, they're already smart enough to think of that.

[@leviathan-supersystem]

​@@patrickp8315 You havent been beaten down by how insane capital and markets are.. None of this matters if the current mass extinction doesnt end. That means stopping our way of commodity production.

[@leviathan-supersystem]

​​@@askani21The past 70 years of stories of how capital and private institutions behave with the information that climate change is going to work and you still think that's cynical. It's very possible that they can spend many billions of dollars doing this and just ends up being a make work program and people make their money and commodity production increases by $200 or 300% and we willl wonder why all of the reptiles and birds went extinct. It isn't just the carbon. You should be more cynical as capitalism is destroying everything you love

[@24acresofparadise]

This is too simplistic of a news report. How are you going to store over 100 billion tons of CO2? Think about it. What is the calculation for the amount of the compound needed to capture 100 billion tons of anything? Does this compound have side effects on us or the atmosphere?

[@jeffg4686]

That's not the problem. There's plenty of space. this would be a WHITE HOUSE BREAKING ANNOUNCEMENT. She didn't even seem too excited???

[@anotherguy9402]

Soda lime already does this way better and only has to be mined 😂 this is the effect of diversity hires in msm and colleges 😂😂😂

[@24acresofparadise]

@@jeffg4686 Plenty of space for what?

[@edmer68]

I'm curious about many aspects of this. Though, instead of being paranoid, I'm going to do some online searches into it and see what info is available. Sounds strange, but, you do you.

[@24acresofparadise]

@@edmer68 There’s no paranoia here; the issue lies in the incomplete reporting. A journalist’s responsibility is to present the full story, asking critical follow-up questions that dig deeper into the facts rather than merely accepting statements at face value. When reporters pursue these essential details, they provide the depth and accuracy that audiences rely on, building a story that informs rather than misleads.

[@giacintodamico1379]

Plant a tree so it could clean the air and create biodiversity. That machine does not attract biodiversity in the environment.

[@gardensoundrecords3598]

What do you do with all the filtered waste, bury it?

[@stevesteve8098]

Something smells here........ Also to remove the co2 from the sample & store it... , it that process carbon negative or positive? because there is no point if making this material & using it produces 2 KG of co2, but then it only removes 1kg of c02

[@lyspaere]

I work near a steel pipe mill that really tries to capture and essentially bag up all the fumes and dust that get vented out of the building. A filter made of this yellow stuff might work well for them!

[@dave9351]

"The gas can be be removed and stored". ? Like nuclear waste ? (Missing pieces here !)

[@GamingKo-u4f]

what i wanna know is the amount of enegy/electricity needed to make it work because I like the tech but I don't want it to be like a powerbank looping its energy and people calling it an infinite energy

[@glennerd3125]

Trees trap CO2 for hundreds of years, can this product? Can we build our houses from this substance? Can we eat this the way we eat plants?

[@420frankp]

Trees trap carbon. Not carbon dioxide. Trees efficiently and effectively scrub CO2 and give back the O2.

[@wutttheheckler2094]

Can something like this be used in Scuba gear for underwater divers 🫧🤿 or for firefighters 👨‍🚒🚒 and their SCBA gear to recycle the air in their tanks?

[@rickjames18]

Can’t we just plants hundreds of billions new trees yearly? Would that help?

[@sunniglory514]

What about the excess methane?

[@rephaelreyes8552]

I bet it costs more energy to produce these kind of stuff

[@tomrogers4667]

What are the long term health effects on humans when mixed with other compounds.

[@AfraidMonsters]

The fact they need to do this instead of the rich just stopping producing plastic which is harmful to us in every way.

[@theboringchannel2027]

the poor people rely on plastic to survive

[@conanobrian8580]

If only this scientist collaborated with all the youtube science community they would together solve the problem but he needs to contact everyone on youtube asap or hes spinning his wheels

[@mikeyjordan6035]

Is any Co2 produced making the compound?

[@TheDoomWizard]

Tons. And imagine distributing it across the globe in the middle of a war.

[@mistahtom]

@@TheDoomWizard this! 💯

[@hardhat9224]

@@TheDoomWizard and you know this how??? you are BSing

[@anotherguy9402]

Way more than mining soda lime which absorbs twice as much co2 by weight than this product does 😂. Quit being gullible sheeple

[@edmer68]

@@anotherguy9402Not sure where the gullibilty is, but, link to real info, please?

[@ColinPoole]

We got a movie plot forming here. They go to do something noble with this stuff somewhere they think they need extra CO2 removal, but they use too much, or miscalculate something - it robs too much CO2, no CO2 for trees to photosynthesize, trees die, world turns into dust bowl - Interstellar?

[@awesomeaxiegameplays7296]

too little c02 is bad too

[@Jc-ms5vv]

Species seemed to do just fine with “low” for millions of years

[@userTZARBOMBA]

My concern is, how trees would cope up with this chemical that removes CO2 from the air....we know that they need CO2 to live.... GSR

[@KaelumYodi]

How much pollution is created while creating this powder? How much pollution is created while removing the CO2 from the powder? How much pollution is created while recharging the powder?

[@RMX7777]

Isnt this just a CO2 scrubber? We've had those for a long time.

[@hantrio4327]

It's a pretty good scrubber but only interesting maybe for submarines

[@danthomas6587]

So how many of these gamechanging devices does the earth need to be effective, 150,000,000?

[@o5037]

Yeah it’s like 😑. Also this ‘research’ is funded and directed by Shell… so they definitely just doing this to distract that they are causing the real issues….

[@TaLeng2023]

How much CO2 is generated creating the compound?

[@stable_davefusion]

How much CO2 created in the manufacturing process vs. what it can eradicate, is my first question before even watching…

[@lopez6617]

What is the waste product this leaves behind?? Also does it leave traces of itself in the air it cleans. Are we going to be breathing in this yellow miracle compound?

[@thesoundsmith]

"...the gas can be removed and stored." How efficiently? Where to store it? I thought THIS was the storage medium, but there is further energy required and long-term space requirements. I love the initial idea, but more info needed, please.

[@PhilipX2030]

Let's get it to solid storage... Potentially pyrolysis

[@orlandorocha6390]

although this is an excellent step forward, these scientists should work on figuring out how exactly all of this CO2 will be stored.

[@BrentRyley]

More red herrings in the green algae pool.

[@nbrown3834]

Thank you so much guys.

[@zkk1001]

What is it? How is it made? What is it made from? how much energy does it take to produce? Is it toxic? Where will we store all of the used yellow powder? Can it be recycled or reused somehow? Too many questions to answer before its a real "Game changer". I hope it works out to be the silver bullet... but

[@o5037]

Prob not,,, all this research is funded by Shell and BP oil. Most likely just another false solution to distract from the urgency of the current issues, using fossil fuels to start.

[@dagwort]

Despite popular consensus, some climate scientists still hold reasonables doubt over CO2's actual warming effect. Pre-industrial atmospheric CO2 was the equivalent of *two and a half* black pennies in a pile of _10,000_ pennies. It's now equal to a bit more than just _four pennies_ in 10,000. That being said, nothing wrong with hedging our bets. All that carbon sequestered over hundreds of millions of years suddenly released back in the atmosphere over but a few centuries is certainly worth the worry. Inventing a way to efficiently stuff all that carbon back into the Earth is I think a good thing.

[@almackenzie2549]

The warming effect of CO2 was shown in 1856 in a scientific paper. The paper has never been disproven to this day.

[@SubTropicSam]

Great piece. Last line misses the point however. CO2 isn’t pollution. Rather, too much of it heats up the oceans and atmosphere creating climate change problems. I’m glad this student from another country is in the US.

[@vulcan4d]

Oil companies love this man.

[@bkbland1626]

You can bet that there will be unforseen consequences.

[@justanghozzst8218]

So cynical

[@sdgreen4580]

The world emits 37 gigatons of CO annually. We're going to need a lot of powder!

[@thomaslautenberger6447]

This graduate student is about to be in a plane crash.

[@fargoth391]

🤣

[@Jnthncrrll]

@@thomaslautenberger6447 OH YOU SHUT UP, THOMAS THE TRUMPSTER FREAK AND THAT IS A VERY CRUEL THING TO SAY!!!!!

[@xchopp]

Nope! On the contrary, the oil & gas folks will protect him: "yay, we can keep burning carbon-based fuels, we're rich, RICH I tell you! Oh wait, richER."

[@computerlearingchannel4257]

Why ? Plants been doing this since day one

[@anotherguy9402]

If you're iq is equivalent to a box of rocks then yes... If not then you already know soda lime absorbs twice as much co2 than this does by weight and creates a fraction of the co2 to produce as this garbage the college student made. You people are so clueless it's disgusting

[@balghair1]

Funny thing is plants do that already including the fields of grass that cows feed on while fertilizing

[@NirvanaFan5000]

but then the plants die and the cows crap and all the gases go back in the air. meanwhile, global tree coverage is shrinking daily

[@superfinevids]

So what happens when all that carbon is bound to this substance? Where do we put it?

[@NirvanaFan5000]

one idea is to mix it with certain minerals so it turns to stone. other ideas are to recycle it as a feedstock for chemical industries. e.g. it could be used to make methane, which is a precursor for many important chemicals. so lots of possibilities. the issue is always efficiency and cost, but this breakthrough seems like it has a lot of potential on the capture side of the equation.

[@oreillysc1]

Wow. Thats neat. So half of what a tree or other plant can do. Now if they can find a way to take the removed co2 and make o2 out of it they’ll be as technologically sophisticated as all plants on the planet.

[@kris4786]

Just plant more trees. You don't need to be a genius to understand the carbon cycle in the environment. Learned this is middle school earth science in 8th grade.

[@Synclexia]

Maybe not in California. The trees will burn down and release the CO2 back into the atmosphere. 🤔

[@gort5583]

Most of the CO2 is absorbed by algae in the ocean and the ocean covers 75% of the earth and is also where most of our oxygen come from.

[@mjt1517]

Or use this substance. Better living through chemistry.

[@edmer68]

That's not where we get the vast majority of our oxygen, Bill DeNye. On another topic, that seems sadly late to learn about photosynthesis.

[@edmer68]

@@mjt1517 Science is god's way of telling you he doesn't exist.

[@Clark42EoC]

As long as it doesn't suffocate plant life.

[@thomasjgour4678]

That's the whole point of what these losers are trying to do

[@TheHypnotstCollector]

the trees need CO2 to make oxygen. Oh, wait.... All the forests are being burned.

[@beth8775]

Don't be disingenuous. Obviously, nobody wants to remove *all* the CO2 from the entire atmosphere. The goal is to filter out enough to put things back in balance.

[@TheHypnotstCollector]

@@beth8775 When that CO2 is caught in this cof it needs to be extracted and put somewhere, that somewhere is in a complex of underground pipelines, thousands of miles of pipes at 2000+PSI, flowing into another container. I'll take the trees.

[@tomp8871]

@@beth8775 and where might be that balance?

[@MarSchlosser]

then tell the greedy liberals to stop.

[@MarSchlosser]

@@beth8775 It is in balance. It's when it's out of balance we get ice ages. When ranchers can buy water to grow and graze cover crops, then you'll see a lot colder winters because of a lot less CO2. this creepy thing goes right back to Arrhenius, who developed the climate change model, telling nazis they had to wipe out the undesirable people to save the planet. It's a hoax.

[@Travluminatii]

What is “it”

[@unplugfromthematrix1688]

Sounds idiotic. Considering optimal plant growth is 2000ppm and we are around 396ppm currently.

[@dustenekoes28]

Yes. Obviously if we take CO2 away from plants, what will they use for their structure? It would be like removing calcium from people; say bye to our bones lol. Not to mention if they just trap the CO2 without changing it to O2 like plants do, that could lead to other problems in the far future that we can’t even fathom. But for optimal plant growth you talk about, 1,000 ppm or above would be detrimental to animal life. Great for plants! Not so much for us lol

[@Cosmic-Wanderer]

They can do everything but look after the people.

[@zzzluvsk]

People are so dumb. It’s a realistic solution to put stuff like this in the exhaust outputs of huge industrial factories. Obviously we need more trees as well, but the reality is that we are so entrenched in burning fossil fuels as a society that this solution is actually critically important for where we are now - transitioning out of using oil as a primary source of energy but still heavily relying on it

[@thomasjgour4678]

I guess you just let everyone know your dumber than the people you just called dumb. It is insanly unrealistic to put this crap in industrial smoke stacks. I've met rocks smarter than you

[@FarmerRiddick]

It sounds great. What's the trade off and down sides? Can it be adapted to a vehicle or cargo ships exhaust system, for example?

[@Sixrabbbit]

Great. We need to use other strategies as well, such as planting more trees and using bio fuels with carbon sequestration using biochar.

[@ginaslifetoo]

Wow isn't that what plants do and they just grow? They don't have to be developed by some science. They just need planted instead of stripped.

[@chrischungy]

But we use twice as much CO2 to make the compound.

[@Airsole23]

Stop spreading fake news

[@TheRhinestoneHurricane]

@@Airsole23that’s a valid concern🤔

[@European-Man-88]

@@Airsole23Stop overusing that term, you're not helping. Use your head, be balanced.

[@ScottKaneshiro]

@@TheRhinestoneHurricaneit’s not a question

[@TheRhinestoneHurricane]

@@ScottKaneshiro I edited it 😉

[@NorthernLupine123]

You all realize that CO2 is what plants breath in right? They kinda need it to like grow, get bigger, breath in more CO2...

[@hantrio4327]

They were already able to do that 200 years ago when the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere was lower

[@lucisimpson4802]

So remove the plant food from the air? Will that cause the tree defoliation? Was it tested on trees? Feels like they had a 'orange' substance that in another time... so the effects on plants seem important to examine or worth mentioning.

[@gort5583]

That planet warming gas also is what all plants on land and algae in the ocean need to survive and if CO2 gets to 180ppm then most plants and algae will die. We are at 400ppm and trees, plants and algae are thriving. Just how low do you want to go?

[@MrRVRclubprez]

Every fountain drink sold in every city, has co2 added to it, every super big gulp releases co2 in the atmosphere

[@edmer68]

What percentage do they contribute?

[@justanghozzst8218]

​@@edmer68Negligible

[@gabe2738]

Co2 does not cause damage …

[@NickSklias]

A half pound of the powder can pull more Co2 out of the air than a full grown tree.

[@myguitardidyermom212]

sure, but I don't need any expensive infrastructure to make a tree. In fact, the tree does most of the work. We just have to stop getting in the way.

[@NickSklias]

@@myguitardidyermom212 one solution is not mutually exclusive. Implementing multiple solutions may be our only hope at this point.

[@outlawbillionairez9780]

@@NickSklias Goon Tube Police blocked my comment about large country near Taiwan, that has planted hundreds of billions of trees for decades. 🇨🇳

[@xynonners]

"the climate crisis will not be solved by a silver bullet, but by a silver buckshot" ​@@NickSklias

[@mrschnider6521]

there is no climate crisis, in the desert it can be 90 degrees during the day, and 30 at night. this is because there is no cloud cover or moisture. Co2 only makes up .04% and under 0.02% plants can no longer grow. Co2 is not a poison, no trace amount of any gas will determine the climate. water has the highest thermal mass of any common materal ourt planet is coverd by it and it mixes with eachother to make it very difficult to ever change the temp. the earth is prodicted to warm up 1 degree which is below the margin of error and less than my backyard increses in temperature from 8am to 10am. taking co2 out of the atmosphere when our plants and crops desperatly need it is absolutely ludacris and a threat to our environment. These people are absolutely crazy, this is the biggest con ever created and it shows the damage done by scientific fraud frome climate change to food groups we need to use common sense and learn to think for ourselves.

[@megamanx466]

It's that "industrial scale" part that's the problem a lot of the time. Vehicle above car size having increasingly better fuel efficiency regulations again would also be nice! 😅

[@paulbush6503]

What could go wrong?

[@MrJackwork]

These people are out of their minds.

[@logitwood1232]

It’s funny 😂

[@alexv1190]

What science degree do you two have?

[@anthonypruneda3890]

That's nothing new ppl have known this already. They just want to put a price on it so we can pay for it . Get ready to pay

[@phishmi1]

Now if they can build homes with what they get at the end of the process, or some significant use, we'd be on to something.

[@stretch4130]

There's 0.04% of carbon in the atmosphere plants need 0.02% to grow and survive. We would have no plant life ieft. We should stop cutting down forests for non recyclable wind turbines and solar panels

[@ronaldcole7415]

There’s so much money here they didn’t talk about. Industrial carbon is worth tens times its weight in gold and then some. It can be used to generate energy while being recaptured at the same time. This guy could become the wealthiest man on earth.

[@marcmanalli]

I was going to leave a snarky comment that unless this is profitable it won't be put to use at a scale large enough to do any good but if what you're saying is true then it really is a solution to the problem. Additionally it would be a real solution to the problem if the patent was free to anyone on Earth to make and use it.

[@villainforfun3034]

Yes. Removing co2 from The air, hurts plants. Let’s not do that

[@scotthughes7440]

For all the comments saying "Just plant trees..." you miss the entire point. Trees need to be cared for...

[@ramonluquin2612]

Plus we've trying to argue for that for years. Its the people you all call commies or liberals.

[@machineenvyllc437]

lol trees need to just not be cleared cut they will take care of themselves

[@freddyrodriguez4732]

idiot trees are barely a drop in the bucket of carbon sequestration lol

[@Theodore-tj4jo]

BS if trees needed to be cared for what about the billions of years of trees with no humans ? Did you grow up in a city ???

[@machineenvyllc437]

@@freddyrodriguez4732 that’s not true need to look that one up they count for 20-30% depending on which studies you cite. that is not really a small amount

[@ogadlogadl490]

2:34 Where exactly is the gas stored?

[@dwightdixon8508]

Sooooo they’ve created something that can make trees extinct? Brilliant idea humankind

[@stoneageart9965]

who needs plants ? we have democrats

[@hantrio4327]

How can it make trees extinct?

[@stoneageart9965]

@@hantrio4327 CO2 is currently .04% of the atmosphere,if it drops much more plant life will suffer and if I am not mistaken animal life depends on plants. No CO2 no trees

[@hantrio4327]

@@stoneageart9965 the CO2 concentration was lower 100 years ago but plants still existed

[@stoneageart9965]

@@hantrio4327 no they were not to any measurable amount,Did you know CO2 was higher during the ice ages ?..(Hint before cars)

[@zein9227]

That's great, where is it going to store it? There's also a thing called plants, wetlands, soil and oceans which have that amazing ability to absorb CO2 from the air and store it underneath the surface atmosphere. Maybe scientist should look into that... This would lend itself rather to a small scale filtering system like HAPA filters or so. But then it wouldn't make the news.

[@kmanbay6580]

The amount of CO2 in the air is 0.04 percent, which is an infinitely small amount. The Malcovich cycle is likely a bigger component of the small rise in the temperature. Remember we are in the interglacial cycle right now, which means it is warmer.

[@whatabouttheearth]

😂 It's not "Malcovich cycle", it's Milankovitch Cycles. Go take some college courses. The Milankovitch Cycles have nothing to do with anthropogenic climate change Look up the 'Seuss Effect'. Atmospheric 12C and 13C isotopes have increased in the same isotopic ratio found in plants, but NOT the radioactive 14C which means that the vast majority of atmospheric CO2 increase we are seeing is due to an ancient plant where the radioactive isotope has already depleted. This can only be one thing, fossil fuels, primarily coal from the Carboniferous and Permian periods of the Paleozoic. (14C isotopes increase in the 50s due to nuclear testing but after the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1963 began to "decrease" causing us to be able to discern that offset, really that "decrease" was the increase in 12C from fossil fuels). --------------------------------- Atmospheric CO2- 1977 - 333ppm 2022 - over 400ppm --------------------------------- You are literally ignorant on this.

[@whatabouttheearth]

😂 It's not "Malcovich cycle", it's Milankovitch Cycles. Go take some college courses. The Milankovitch Cycles have nothing to do with anthropogenic climate change Look up the 'Seuss Effect'. Atmospheric 12C and 13C isotopes have increased in the same isotopic ratio found in plants, but NOT the radioactive 14C which means that the vast majority of atmospheric CO2 increase we are seeing is due to an ancient plant where the radioactive isotope has already depleted. This can only be one thing, fossil fuels, primarily coal from the Carboniferous and Permian periods of the Paleozoic. (14C isotopes increase in the 50s due to nuclear testing but after the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1963 began to "decrease" causing us to be able to discern that offset, really that "decrease" was the increase in 12C from fossil fuels). --------------------------------- Atmospheric CO2- 1977 - 333ppm 2022 - over 400ppm --------------------------------- You are literally ignorant on this.

[@dawnemile7499]

They don't want this product because they won't be able to extort money for carbon taxes.

[@Bartheo]

This sounds like a zombie movie in the making😂 better stock up

[@hossjohnser9556]

Is it scalable? And how much does it cost?

[@joyofalltrades1239]

Ppl gone be snorting that in not time

[@lovewillwinnn]

Wow... it looks like you did!

[@glennerd3125]

We all know enough not to eat yellow snow, now we need to learn not to snort the yellow powder.....

[@Mrinternational89]

CO2 going into the soil and oceans. Also photosynthetic organisms convert it to Oxygen

[@susanmuziq2424]

We already have everything we need. Trees take in carbon dioxide and give us oxygen to breathe. It's a perfect situation. And if there is no carbon dioxide, trees die and we get no oxygen to breathe.

[@JohnnyRelentless]

Home-schooled, huh?

[@richardbice980]

​@@JohnnyRelentlessCO2 is plant food if it gets to low all the plants die, I die, you die, everything dies. Do you understand?

[@PhilipX2030]

Your education is extremely limited. Look up why the United Nations is terrified about global warming because too much CO2 and methane / natural gas have been admitted, gigatons every year

[@PhilipX2030]

​@@richardbice980you are not aware CO2 is presently 420 PPM, where previously before the industrial revolution it was 350 PPM. Why don't you look up the topic. This is a serious problem. The oceans have absorbed most of the CO2 but they are becoming acidic. You have never heard of this in your life. How old are you and why don't you have anyone intelligence around you? The oceans are so acidic with CO2 it is dissolving calcium shells on mollusks. Like an Alka-Seltzer. Look it up. The rise of CO2 is beyond plants ability to absorb it. You don't know any of this because you have no one knowledgeable around you; only fossil fuel propaganda. **Stop watching Fox News and look up the topics on Wikipedia. It is essential as much CO2 as possible can be absorbed - because over 190 years of fossil fuel burning is catastrophically melting the polar ice caps. Sea level rise is happening and will get quicker. Change where you get your information.

[@LyricsQuest]

Exactly, the earth takes care of itself just fine. It was doing just peachy during the Jurassic Period when CO2 levels were 7 times higher.

[@pulido6974]

It's great to hear a story about a Scientist. creating something to Help the planet instead of weapons to destroy our planet and humanity.

[@crossthreadmcalthair399]

There go the trees living!

[@ants7279]

What is this Co2 that they speak of?

[@certifiedquality6381]

Don't play with fire , don't tamper with earth

[@edmer68]

Pretty sure that warning's a few millenia too late.

[@justanghozzst8218]

That's like spilling milk and saying let's not tamper with the sticky ground we just made

[@Justaguyinthecornerofthescreen]

This is actually pretty helpful in many ways to help the plan a recovery faster in certain situations but overall a lot more information needed to know if safe