#scam I paid @Climeworks £1,650 to remove 2 tons of CO2 from the atmosphere. Was I a gullible idiot? Yes. Icelandic newspaper @heimildinhas shown that they not only haven’t captured my 2 tons, they don’t even capture their own emissions heimildin.is/FGY3 via @heimildin - ThreadSky

protons4b.bsky.social • 39 days ago

#scam I paid @Climeworks £1,650 to remove 2 tons of CO2 from the atmosphere. Was I a gullible idiot? Yes.

Icelandic newspaper @heimildinhas shown that they not only haven’t captured my 2 tons, they don’t even capture their own emissions https://heimildin.is/FGY3 via @heimildin

Comments

dangrey.bsky.social•39 days ago

I wonder why Climeworks' process isn't working, and I wonder if 1PointFive's, which is very similar, does?
https://www.1pointfive.com/

protons4b.bsky.social•39 days ago

Dan: Where is the evidence that it is working?

dangrey.bsky.social•39 days ago

That's what I'm asking 🙂. From reading the website 1PointFive/Carbon Engineering are nearing completion of their pilot plant. I hope they have more success than Climeworks.

mbensonster.bsky.social•39 days ago

You can't fix problems caused by too much technology with more technology.

chrismardell.bsky.social•39 days ago

I think it’s a little unfair of the article to their compare current year emissions to current year capture at a time of scaling up; the embodied energy (but not operating energy) needs to be amortised over the life of a system.

chrismardell.bsky.social•39 days ago

The first question I’d like to know is whether the slower-than-expected capture and scale-up, and high energy inputs are “this shit is more difficult than we thought” teething problems, or insoluble constraints.

chrismardell.bsky.social•39 days ago

I agree that CCS is not a solution to emissions. But my second question is whether we need it to remove existing CO2 even after we get to net zero, and if so, whether such a system can be efficient enough to do the job.

chrismardell.bsky.social•39 days ago

We’re seeing now that we’ve already taken too much CO2 from the ground, so ultimately some of it has to go back, in some form or another. So I think we need to pursue CCS, but it’s no excuse to continue emissions — just as we need both electric cars, and the infrastructure that makes them redundant.

e-quinn.bsky.social•38 days ago

Trees and kelp are great natural carbon sinks.
We should all be protecting & restoring natural ecosystems.
And of course reducing our carbon footprint.

hodmanjohn.bsky.social•38 days ago

This isn't the kind of activity that can be trusted to a profit driven Company. Assuming that the technology actually works and at a sustainable cost, this is something that should be undertaken by Governments worldwide with rock solid targets in place.

alanf.bsky.social•38 days ago

It's not unusual for cutting edge technology to go wrong. The question is whether it can be fixed or not.
It's understandable that Climeworks aren't going to go into the details in public. The best indicator of whether it is fixable or not will be if it continues to attract major investments.

protons4b.bsky.social•38 days ago

Alan, Good Morning. I disagree.

Investment is not the issue- they have loads of money. What they lack is credibility.

They have had a decade with practically unlimited funding and it still doesn't work. But they have continued to sell carbon credits. In short, it's a scam.

andrewsawyou.bsky.social•38 days ago

Could have planted 55 trees with 5 years of aftercare for that money.

alixdragon.bsky.social•39 days ago

CCS was always gonna be a scam
It’s just a bit too deus ex machina

jackandreasen.bsky.social•35 days ago

https://bsky.app/profile/jackandreasen.bsky.social/post/3lpjwwwnm522s

protons4b.bsky.social•34 days ago

Climeworks is utterly opaque, hiding its performance as best it can.

In engineering terms, Climeworks is slow and un-innovative.

Climeworks has become a financial engineering project rather than an enterprise focussed on chemical engineering.

protons4b.bsky.social•34 days ago

At some point we may be in need of CCS, so it makes sense to invest in it now so that it can scale for when we need it in the 2050's.

But what we need now is research. That is not what Climeworks is offering.

protons4b.bsky.social•34 days ago

I can't read your article.

But in general, I agree that fact that Climeworks' technology isn't working very well doesn't necessarily mean it's a scam.

But as best I can make out, it is actually I scam.

jackandreasen.bsky.social•34 days ago

What is the scam? Are you saying it’s fraudulent, as in illegal?

protons4b.bsky.social•34 days ago

Last year I asked "Is it a scam?"

https://protonsforbreakfast.wordpress.com/2024/09/02/supporting-climeworks-am-i-a-gullible-idiot/