this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2026
64 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
85615 readers
3216 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The 2,500 tons of Co2 are roughly equivalent to the tailpipe emissions of 550 avg. australian cars.
So, a wet fart.
This is/has been a test facility, not a large scale million-s tons a year thing. Because that's not yet possible, this is a step in a good direction. It's a tremendous advancement that can hopefully continue to be scaled up.
It's a technofix for a problem that should be adressed way earlier in the pipeline, as is basically all carbon capture in general. These efforts divert energy and attention from solutions that actually matter.
DAC is also a nice deus ex drop in for climate scientists to make the findings more palable for corruct heads of states, padding a non existing carbon budget or even making it possible to return to semi stable ghg concentrations "theoretically possible".
It's better than shitting in your hands and clapping, as the saying goes
Given activism fatigue and attention etc are limited, I would say it's way worse.
The fuck is activism fatigue?
Are you describing getting tired of trying to make the world slightly less shitty, to the point where you post denigrating comments saying anything that isn't "We fixed everything in one go, turns out it was easier than we all thought" as pointless?
Or are you just annoyed at the fact that people care enough about the concept of survivng the next 100 years to actually do something about it?
It's also the amount of Co2 captured by roughly 10000 trees in a year - with apparently around 1.2 million being planted in Australia each day. I'm no expert, but I do think trees are a slightly cheaper and simpler solution for creating stuff with captured carbon.
Aka wood.
Sure but every tree you plant takes up space and there is a limit how much you can do this. Unless you then farm them and store th carbon long term somehow
Australia isn't exactly going to be running out of space for forests any time soon. They are going to run out of forests if they keep it up though, cutting roughly 55 million tonnes of co2 worth of trees annually.
Kinda doubt it makes much sense to be building 22 000 carbon capture plants a year just to break even, instead of replanting the trees.
Build one of these in a year, or plant 10 thousand trees and wait decades for them to grow...
Making a cubic metre of concrete creates almost half a ton of Co2, so it will take years if not decades for the plant to even make up being built. A tree starts capturing immediately and keeps doing so for decades all by itself.