Carbon capture proposal for UK

[GregLocock]

https://dailysceptic.org/2024/05/05...o-spend-30-billion-removing-co2-from-the-air/

30 billion pounds to remove one CO2 molecule for every 41700 that currently exists in the atmosphere.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[LittleInch]

I don't mind a bit of scepticism as it keeps everyone on their toes a bit more, but this is clearly never going to happen.

The CCS projects though are going full steam and are much better ways to remove co2 from entering the atmosphere in the first place.

That and the blue hydrogen plants being proposed.

It's easy to throw rocks at silly fantasies like this, but much harder to come up with solutions....

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[GregLocock]

Well the rent seekers win again. The UK is about to spend 22B on carbon capture, which will reduce UK's CO2 emissions by... 3%. Be still my beating heart.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4301n3771o

OTOH if this works, it would seem the UK could go carbon neutral for less than 3 years of the NHS budget. Without building any more windmills or transmission lines.



Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[Tomfh]

The world’s gone mad.

 

[TugboatEng]

The savings never include the capital costs.

 

[GregLocock]

I like it because it puts a pin in the board for an overall cost. Call it 1000B

Now, Uk runs about 70 GW, so needs about 70 GW of power, which according to my maths teacher is 70 decent sized reactors. So, since Abu Dhabi installed 5 GW for $32B, we can take 8B per GW as an inflated price for installing 70 identical reactor units, 560B all up

Or you can pursue wind/solar/storage at 1600 B . and replace it every 15-25 years.

All of these need financing and so on, so double the cost to the poor energy user.

OK, all very whiteboardy numbers, and there are advantages and disadvantages to each (CCS and floating offshore wind both being spectacularly unproven long shots), and you'll end up with a mixture,

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[TugboatEng]

I think most people forget econ 101 and that loans create inflation because they create money. In this case not only are we increasing the cost of energy but we're also decreasing the value of our money. A real lose-lose.

 

[dik]

The UK has the greatest number of homeless people in the Western world.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[rb1957]

sorry, the UK has more homeless people than the US ? or Brazil ?? If so, that's got to be created (IMHO) by definitions and data collection.

"Wir hoffen, dass dieses Mal alles gut gehen wird!"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.

 

[dik]

My error... based on per capita...

It's a growth industry...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[GregLocock]

As usual Mr Irrelevant per capita thread drift derails the thread. Is it so hard to start a new thread?

I suggest you find the definition of rent seeker.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking

- it has little to do with housing, especially in the context of this thread. I also suggest you look at the pink, homeless, not green, living in a non traditional dwelling. Many of the latter are illegal immigrants awaiting visa determination.





Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[Joyaloorg]

I think most people forget econ 101 and that loans create inflation because they create money. In this case not only are we increasing the cost of energy but we're also decreasing the value of our money. A real lose-lose.

I agree with this opinion

 

[dik]

The UK is on it's way to becoming a third world country.

 

[LittleInch]

Slight over reaction there dik.

There is a lot here in definitions of "homelessness" which most would think of as the pink bit.

In total nos that's about 280,000. My guess is about 70,000 of that or maybe more are asylum seekers, but yes, there are lots of people priced out of accommodation due to decades of not enough social housing been built / sold off by the state and then councils not allowed to re-build using that money. So it helped those who could buy, but has taken 20-30 years to work its way through into not enough homes available. Won't be fixed even in 10 years is my guess or at all unless people sacrifice land deemed "greenbelt". Building new houses is now at least a major priority for the new government, but its no easy fix.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Coming back to the carbon capture proposal..... Thirty Billion dollars is quite a lot of money for relatively little effect.

Maybe we could spend that money more efficiently by planting trees and re-foresting areas where clear cutting had been done. I think we'll find it likely that plant life will be more efficient in CO2 emission that these silly things we're trying to do.

Heck, what if we created green houses that were filled with pumped in CO2? I think we already do this in some places for growing food. Then we use whatever the plants produced in ways that won't immediately release the CO2 back into the environment.

 

[dik]

Slight over reaction there dik.

Like so many good things... we'll have to wait. The UK has been going downhill for the last couple of decades. It hasn't hit bottom.

 

[LittleInch]

If you read the original link it's pretty clear this is just some vague idea being floated about by a consultancy and there is zero chance of this happening.

The other CCS stuff I think has legs and is really just a way of dealing with current large scale emissions whilst retaining the original infrastructure and use of natural gas.