Don't even suggest that. The malthusian psychos running things here in the West will hatch a scheme to bury babies in order to sequester the carbon they contain.
Let's all remember that carbon credits are a scam in their own right. Al Gore has become quite rich off of them. They are a means to separate well intentioned people from their money.
Word needs to start spreading rapidly that NetZero (targeting no net CO2 emissions) is also a total scam. NetZero is simply an unfeasible political target based on imaginary worst case scenarios of climate temperature outcomes with docile nations signing on to erroneous IPCC reports. (IPCC is a subcommittee of the United Nations! No credibility, just a wealth transfer grift.)
N2N (nat. gas to nuclear) is finally being recognized as the most feasible path forward for increased energy production; CO2 can be damned! More atmospheric CO2, just grow more timber and food sources.
I’m suggesting that the (stupid) investors continue to send the company money, in return for the company promising to NOT build any more machinery and NOT attempt to capture any atmospheric CO2. The benefits would be greater.
Don't laugh. That is indeed one type of scam they frequently use. Mostly they buy forested land, and then claim carbon credits for not logging the forest. Except the logging companies just harvest their quotas elsewhere. And if their private forest accidentally-on-purpose burns down, they won't be returning any credits they were paid. Instead they will get more credits for regrowing the forest on their land.
I'm thinking of setting up an organization that collects money for NOT doing anything that might generate emissions. We won't build a factory. We won't dig anything up or chop anything down. We won't make anything. We won't buy or sell anything. We won't move anything around. Imagine the carbon emissions we won't create!
Anybody want to join me in writing up a business plan?
Same idea, just expanding it beyond the forest carbon credit scams. You missed your chance though, if you had started an NGO promoting that scam, hired a prominent Democrat (like Stacey Abrams) as an executive, and applied for an IRA grant at the end of the Biden regime, they funneled off $100B to similar scams.
And I suspect that if they wait 10yrs or so, nobody keeps account of the carbon credit $cash$ they scammed, so they can then log the forest and make more $bucks$ selling lumber. And then get more carbon credits regrowing the forest.
You may learn about a Carbon Capture and Storage boondoggle much closer to the United States. It is SaskPower's Boundary Dam 3 (BD3) project in Saskatchewan, Canada. BD3 is the only operational grid-scale CCS project in the world. The project has much higher efficiency than DAC, because it is drawing the CO2 from the flue of a small (110 net MW) coal-fired power plant. This project summary is maintained by MIT. (The actual CO2 capture efficiency is much lower than 90%.) http://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/boundary_dam.html
The key statistic is that the project as of September 30, 2016, the project had already cost $1.5 billion Canadian.
Some major repair and update projects are planned during the next few months. The project has captured a total of 6.833 MMT of CO2 since startup in 2014. Including the unknown, but likely large BD3 operations and maintenance costs since September 30, 2016, CGNP calculates the cost of the captured carbon to be about $300 Canadian per tonne. The CO2 is used for enhanced oil recovery from an oil field about 66 km away. About half of the CO2 from enhanced oil recovery eventually escapes into the atmosphere. Thus the sequestration cost is about $600 Canadian per tonne. I believe such high sequestration costs qualifies this project as a boondoggle.
The roughly $2 billion Canadian funds that went up in smoke at BD3 should have been used to fund the refurbishment of some CANDU reactors in Ontario, Canada. This refurbishment would have prevented a far larger quantity of fossil energy from being combusted.
Jacobson complained that Climeworks and its supporters don't look at the big picture — in this case how much energy it takes to capture and store a tonne of CO2. But in his own "study" that ended up claiming the USA could be powered by about 1,600 GWe of wind, water, and solar, he entirely omitted the materials' requirements, especially for storage. It turns out that more copper, nickel, cobalt, graphite, … are required than are known to exist in recoverable forms.
Details in my book "Where Will We Get Our Energy?" Everything quantified. No vague handwaving. 350 bibliographic citations allow readers to verify I didn't simply make up stuff.
File this one under weird coincidences. Carbon is the basis of life as we know it, right? So in Revelations 666 is the number of the beast, which could be an allegory for all life forms or beasts. OK, so...
Carbon = 6 protons, 6 neutrons, 6 electrons.
I don't know if it means anything, but don't tell the numerologists. They'll have heart attack!
The entire war against CO2 is make believe by arrogant hypocritical grifters. DAC is just an exercise in futility. Carbon capture and storage is truly stupid; and must projects are not capturing CO2 it’s simply exhaust. But the free government money was the mechanism to target public money for the grift. It’s truly disgusting.
I doubt that Al Gore was really prescient and knew this particular CO2 capture technology wasn’t feasible. That said, any reputable university chemical engineering program that covers physics, mass transfer with reaction, and chemical thermodynamics will be able to teach undergraduate students that CO2 capture is not feasible. “Mother Nature is a bitch, but she doesn’t lie”: it is simply impossible to exceed known physical and thermodynamic limits. Politics re CO2 capture got far ahead of science. But university professors & their grad students write proposals to get funding for nonsense. Such whores !!
Good plan, however a prerequisite is that you are a big donor to the DNC or any of the many green NGOs that are in the good books of the Globalist Malthusian Overlords. If you're a Republican, no matter how effective a project, you won't get the funding.
Man made climate change is clearly a scam, but climate change itself is a real thing. For example, where I live was under a kilometre of ice about 12,000 years ago and 160M years ago was a shallow tropical sea chock full of brontosauruses.
The only constant is change itself, and the best advice I've seen on what to about it is this:
If you want to capture carbon just plant more trees. Not in Iceland obviously, but if you're going to throw money away you might as well get some trees out of the deal.
Actually they are successfully reforesting in Iceland, which was once 25-40% birchwoods but is now only 1.5%. Undoubtedly vastly more cost effective at CO2 sequestration than their DAC boondoggle. They could also experiment with ocean fertilization methods, since they are do a lot of ocean fish harvesting.
Funny how all these billionaires buy their carbon credits from these scam operations to pretend to offset all the excess carbon emissions from their giant yachts, private jets and many mansions.
New Canadian PM Mark Carney is very big on promoting these carbon market, carbon credit scams, a typical Banker, they want to financialize everything and use casino capitalist methods to scam the markets they create.
But you never hear about getting carbon credits from building Nuclear Power plants, why not give actual REAL carbon credits for that? Which just shows the green, malthusian ecofascist ideology behind these carbon abatement green agenda schemes. In fact even installing CCGT power plants running as baseload should be able to sell carbon credits for the lower Carbon emissions vs avg grid power.
Dang! Your analysis is so logical, SmithFS! Scammers always are on the lookout for "seekers of opportunity" (aka suckers) that they can enrich themselves by. The scammers are such low-lifes. (And the investigative article notes some scammers siphoned off $600 million from the U.S. Department of Energy during the Biden administration.) :-(
They need to build a solar-powered CO2 capture device! That would solve everything!!!
Frunny!
Magical thinking will save the planet !
People could just have more babies! Babies capture a lot carbon.
True, but what goes in, must come out, lol
Average human exhales almost 1 kg of CO2/day.
deMS-13 even more hot air.
I'm not so worried about what they exhale as what they excrete.
Eeewwww!
Don't even suggest that. The malthusian psychos running things here in the West will hatch a scheme to bury babies in order to sequester the carbon they contain.
Let's all remember that carbon credits are a scam in their own right. Al Gore has become quite rich off of them. They are a means to separate well intentioned people from their money.
Right! Gore became a billionaire off of his climate scare.
Exactly. And new Canadian PM Mark Carney is busily promoting a massive expansion of the those scams. All Canadians will be required to contribute.
Tis a shame with all their Petro resources and hydro
Word needs to start spreading rapidly that NetZero (targeting no net CO2 emissions) is also a total scam. NetZero is simply an unfeasible political target based on imaginary worst case scenarios of climate temperature outcomes with docile nations signing on to erroneous IPCC reports. (IPCC is a subcommittee of the United Nations! No credibility, just a wealth transfer grift.)
N2N (nat. gas to nuclear) is finally being recognized as the most feasible path forward for increased energy production; CO2 can be damned! More atmospheric CO2, just grow more timber and food sources.
Perfectly said!
You might like our CO2 capture "needle in the haystack" article with a few basic thermodynamics principles thrown in.
The First Law teaches that there is no such thing as renewable energy!
Stop by again.
Best,
TC
I’m suggesting that the (stupid) investors continue to send the company money, in return for the company promising to NOT build any more machinery and NOT attempt to capture any atmospheric CO2. The benefits would be greater.
Don't laugh. That is indeed one type of scam they frequently use. Mostly they buy forested land, and then claim carbon credits for not logging the forest. Except the logging companies just harvest their quotas elsewhere. And if their private forest accidentally-on-purpose burns down, they won't be returning any credits they were paid. Instead they will get more credits for regrowing the forest on their land.
I'm thinking of setting up an organization that collects money for NOT doing anything that might generate emissions. We won't build a factory. We won't dig anything up or chop anything down. We won't make anything. We won't buy or sell anything. We won't move anything around. Imagine the carbon emissions we won't create!
Anybody want to join me in writing up a business plan?
Is there an initiation fee and monthly dues?
Can you do DocuSign?🤔
Same idea, just expanding it beyond the forest carbon credit scams. You missed your chance though, if you had started an NGO promoting that scam, hired a prominent Democrat (like Stacey Abrams) as an executive, and applied for an IRA grant at the end of the Biden regime, they funneled off $100B to similar scams.
Throwing gold bars off the Titanic 😲
Right. Another malthusian web of deception 🤔😡
And I suspect that if they wait 10yrs or so, nobody keeps account of the carbon credit $cash$ they scammed, so they can then log the forest and make more $bucks$ selling lumber. And then get more carbon credits regrowing the forest.
Is there an ETF I can invest in?
😂
A better investment for sure! lol
You may learn about a Carbon Capture and Storage boondoggle much closer to the United States. It is SaskPower's Boundary Dam 3 (BD3) project in Saskatchewan, Canada. BD3 is the only operational grid-scale CCS project in the world. The project has much higher efficiency than DAC, because it is drawing the CO2 from the flue of a small (110 net MW) coal-fired power plant. This project summary is maintained by MIT. (The actual CO2 capture efficiency is much lower than 90%.) http://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/boundary_dam.html
The key statistic is that the project as of September 30, 2016, the project had already cost $1.5 billion Canadian.
The BD3 project is still operational as of this May 2, 2025 update at https://www.saskpower.com/about-us/our-company/blog/2025/bd3-status-update-q1-2025
Some major repair and update projects are planned during the next few months. The project has captured a total of 6.833 MMT of CO2 since startup in 2014. Including the unknown, but likely large BD3 operations and maintenance costs since September 30, 2016, CGNP calculates the cost of the captured carbon to be about $300 Canadian per tonne. The CO2 is used for enhanced oil recovery from an oil field about 66 km away. About half of the CO2 from enhanced oil recovery eventually escapes into the atmosphere. Thus the sequestration cost is about $600 Canadian per tonne. I believe such high sequestration costs qualifies this project as a boondoggle.
The roughly $2 billion Canadian funds that went up in smoke at BD3 should have been used to fund the refurbishment of some CANDU reactors in Ontario, Canada. This refurbishment would have prevented a far larger quantity of fossil energy from being combusted.
CO2 phase diagram and super critical CO2 so very interesting and useful for enhanced oil recovery!
I agree!
Jacobson complained that Climeworks and its supporters don't look at the big picture — in this case how much energy it takes to capture and store a tonne of CO2. But in his own "study" that ended up claiming the USA could be powered by about 1,600 GWe of wind, water, and solar, he entirely omitted the materials' requirements, especially for storage. It turns out that more copper, nickel, cobalt, graphite, … are required than are known to exist in recoverable forms.
Details in my book "Where Will We Get Our Energy?" Everything quantified. No vague handwaving. 350 bibliographic citations allow readers to verify I didn't simply make up stuff.
See also http://vandyke.mynetgear.com/Worse.html
Glad to hear from you Van! I am preparing a thermo physics based piece and will refer back to you as always.
TC
File this one under weird coincidences. Carbon is the basis of life as we know it, right? So in Revelations 666 is the number of the beast, which could be an allegory for all life forms or beasts. OK, so...
Carbon = 6 protons, 6 neutrons, 6 electrons.
I don't know if it means anything, but don't tell the numerologists. They'll have heart attack!
The entire war against CO2 is make believe by arrogant hypocritical grifters. DAC is just an exercise in futility. Carbon capture and storage is truly stupid; and must projects are not capturing CO2 it’s simply exhaust. But the free government money was the mechanism to target public money for the grift. It’s truly disgusting.
I doubt that Al Gore was really prescient and knew this particular CO2 capture technology wasn’t feasible. That said, any reputable university chemical engineering program that covers physics, mass transfer with reaction, and chemical thermodynamics will be able to teach undergraduate students that CO2 capture is not feasible. “Mother Nature is a bitch, but she doesn’t lie”: it is simply impossible to exceed known physical and thermodynamic limits. Politics re CO2 capture got far ahead of science. But university professors & their grad students write proposals to get funding for nonsense. Such whores !!
Can I possibly get a list of Climeworks’ subscribers? I have some other green energy ideas I need investors for.
Right, there is a green sucker born every minute, easy prey.
Good plan, however a prerequisite is that you are a big donor to the DNC or any of the many green NGOs that are in the good books of the Globalist Malthusian Overlords. If you're a Republican, no matter how effective a project, you won't get the funding.
Like my solar-powered solar panel factory!!!!!
Man made climate change is clearly a scam, but climate change itself is a real thing. For example, where I live was under a kilometre of ice about 12,000 years ago and 160M years ago was a shallow tropical sea chock full of brontosauruses.
The only constant is change itself, and the best advice I've seen on what to about it is this:
Adapt.
Or join the brontosauruses.
If you want to capture carbon just plant more trees. Not in Iceland obviously, but if you're going to throw money away you might as well get some trees out of the deal.
Actually they are successfully reforesting in Iceland, which was once 25-40% birchwoods but is now only 1.5%. Undoubtedly vastly more cost effective at CO2 sequestration than their DAC boondoggle. They could also experiment with ocean fertilization methods, since they are do a lot of ocean fish harvesting.
I did not know that!
A bit more CO2 in the atmosphere and a warmer climate will be a great asset for that. I look forward to the day that they grow pineapples in Iceland.
So why is the United States Department of Energy funding this boondoggle in Iceland?
Same reason USA was funding transgender surgeries in Guatemala 🤔🫣
And all this nonsense to solve a non-problem.
CO2 is not a pollutant, nor primary driver of so claimed climate change, aka global warming.
It’s a minuscule, invisible, odourless, tasteless atmospheric trace gas necessary for life on planet Earth!
Sheer madness of the nth degree!
Gee, we had no trouble scrubbing CO2 directly from the atmosphere!
Of course, we had the enclosed atmosphere of a submarine and the power of a nuclear reactor to overcome the Second Law. Easy-peasy, nothing to it.
Outside of an application like that, CO2 scrubbing is hard. CO2 scrubbing using energy you just gained from hydrocarbon combustion is sheer idiocy.
Funny how all these billionaires buy their carbon credits from these scam operations to pretend to offset all the excess carbon emissions from their giant yachts, private jets and many mansions.
New Canadian PM Mark Carney is very big on promoting these carbon market, carbon credit scams, a typical Banker, they want to financialize everything and use casino capitalist methods to scam the markets they create.
But you never hear about getting carbon credits from building Nuclear Power plants, why not give actual REAL carbon credits for that? Which just shows the green, malthusian ecofascist ideology behind these carbon abatement green agenda schemes. In fact even installing CCGT power plants running as baseload should be able to sell carbon credits for the lower Carbon emissions vs avg grid power.
Dang! Your analysis is so logical, SmithFS! Scammers always are on the lookout for "seekers of opportunity" (aka suckers) that they can enrich themselves by. The scammers are such low-lifes. (And the investigative article notes some scammers siphoned off $600 million from the U.S. Department of Energy during the Biden administration.) :-(