Remix clone Hacker News

>The hard part is actually measuring how much carbon you can sequester per kg of 'fake' whale poop.

Do we have a rough estimate of this number? I assume the cost of whale poop can be low once it is mass manufactured. But the real cost is the actual deployment?

▲

emmelaich 4 days ago | parent [-]

We do, we have a model and some experimental data. I can get back later for you with some numbers.

Later .. 200 litres of 'aqua food' for one tonne of sequestered carbon.

▲

ksec 4 days ago | parent [-]

How long does it take to capture that one tonne of carbon?

Our Annual CO2 emission is about 40B tons. In order to be Carbon Negative we need to capture 60 - 80B tons / year.

That is about 80B x 200 Litres of Aqua Food. Or 16 Trillion Litres. Roughly 3 to 4 times the amount of soft drinks Coca cola sold per year.

And doing it continuously for 20 years we would revert back to about 80s.

▲

marcosdumay 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

No form of carbon capture can offset our current emissions. Also, it's incredibly stupid to use capture for that anyway, as it's always much cheaper to cut the emissions at the source.

Carbon capture is for offsetting historical emissions, and the few niche ones that are so hard to replace that we'll need decades of research.

▲

mystified5016 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

We can't do it all this way. For every ton of carbon absorbed you add some multiple of that in plankton biomass.

I'm no ocean ecologist, but it seems like there might be several consequences to adding billions of tons of plankton to the ocean

	▲	emmelaich 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		It dies and sinks to the bottom of the ocean.