Comments 1 - 14 of 14        Search these comments

1   Ceffer   2018 Aug 16, 9:49am  

Will this be called the Trump-Putin Global Warming Processor?
2   🎂 Tenpoundbass   2018 Aug 16, 9:56am  

Scientist brag every time they take a shit these days. I'll be impressed when it's implemented and there are tangible results.
3   Bd6r   2018 Aug 16, 10:04am  

The article is retarded in so many ways, proving once more that journalists are incompetent idiots, and the scientists in question are typical snake oil salesmen.

Quote from article: From there, elemental magnesium combines with the carbonic acid to form magnesite (MgCO3).

The problem with this statement is that production of elemental magnesium requires a lot of energy, thus releasing MORE CO2 than is captured with Mg reacting with CO2/H2O. They also mix terms in article - once it is elemental magnesium that removes CO2, in other place it is magnesite that removes CO2. The original research abstract does not say from what magnesite (MgCO3) is made - this is a key question for understanding the science and efficiency of process.

In short, it appears that incompetent journalists are overselling research that will never be used for anything useful.
5   Bd6r   2018 Aug 16, 10:31am  

tovarichpeter says
Another report from “incompetent journalists”

Yes, I saw that and they are also incompetent. They do not say what reacts with CO2 to make magnesite, which is the key for understanding if this is practical or not. There is also no critical analysis of the data. Basically a lay reader who is not chemist/chemical engineer is left confused and tricked.
6   tovarichpeter   2018 Aug 16, 10:50am  

Yeah, those dumb “lay readers” at PhysOrg
7   zzyzzx   2018 Aug 16, 10:56am  

Why is is so fucking hard for them to figure out that all they really need to do is to plant a shitload of trees?
8   Bd6r   2018 Aug 16, 10:57am  

zzyzzx says
plant a shitload of trees

And produce electricity in nuclear power plants
9   Automan Empire   2018 Aug 16, 10:57am  

dr6B says
They also mix terms in article - once it is elemental magnesium that removes CO2, in other place it is magnesite that removes CO2.


Not sure if you're unclear about the process, or deliberately trying to paint it as worthless using a flawed understanding. The process IS combining elemental magnesium with CO2 to sequester the carbon in magnesite.

dr6B says
The problem with this statement is that production of elemental magnesium requires a lot of energy


That's a fair critique; if the magnesium can be obtained as a byproduct of other processes such as seawater desalination, then it could indeed become a net sink of CO2. Making 10 pounds of CO2 to absorb 1 isn't the way of scientists and environmentalists, but the petroleum industry. Every day they merrily burn $10+ of natural gas to sell you $1 of gasoline, and that's the less intensive extraction processes. Those who praise things like the oil sands works in Canada need to take into account the number of BTUs burned to extract this oil, per BTU of deliverable end product!
10   lostand confused   2018 Aug 16, 10:59am  

So you mean they can't put global warming taxes? Oh wait it is called climate change, so can raise taxes whenever climate changes.
11   Bd6r   2018 Aug 16, 11:02am  

Automan Empire says
if the magnesium can be obtained as a byproduct of other processes such as seawater desalination

How? That process produces magnesium salts (Mg(II)), not magnesium metal. Issue is going to Mg(0) from Mg(II), which is extremely energy consuming. The whole article is horrible bullshit. People have known rapid reactions with atmospheric CO2 for hundreds of years, and some are less exotic and less energy wasteful than the one described.
12   Bd6r   2018 Aug 16, 11:13am  

Automan Empire says
Not sure if you're unclear about the process, or deliberately trying to paint it as worthless using a flawed understanding. The process IS combining elemental magnesium with CO2 to sequester the carbon in magnesite.

Actually, the idea of carbon sequestration by using Mg metal is so outlandishly stupid that I was trying to come up with something else more reasonable as I could simply not believe what they are suggesting. If magnesite would react with CO2 and water to give Mg(HCO3)2 then it would actually make some sense as this process would not be energy inefficient (no need to consume lots of energy to get to Mg metal). But this is not the process they propose
13   NuttBoxer   2018 Aug 16, 11:42am  

tovarichpeter says
Lab made mineral will suck CO2 from atmosphere


So when do we start the mass eradication of all plant life on Earth?
14   Automan Empire   2018 Aug 16, 5:42pm  

dr6B says
How? That process produces magnesium salts


I'm thinking there's a way to combine desalination and magnesium extraction so it becomes much more efficient than either process alone. The ion-rich byproduct of the first used as a feedstock for the second, plus regenerative systems to minimize heat waste from various points in both processes, and solar power to electrolyze elemental magnesium (rather than precipitating salts then extracting magnesium from these) might yield a strongly carbon negative process.

Sure, if you just want to blow off the concept, simply plugging in the numbers of a crude, single purpose magnesium from salt operation makes it sound like a zero sum carbon game or worse.

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions