I’m pretty sure that it’s more energy efficient to not emit a given amount of carbon dioxide by not emitting it via combustion than it is to mechanically capture and sequester it from the atmosphere once emitted.
If you can exploit some process that isn’t directly driven by human-provided energy, like iron seeding of algae, where you’re leveraging plant photosynthesis, okay, then maybe.
Also, even if you have some way of sequestering carbon dioxide, if you’re still emitting it, it’s gonna be cheaper to just capture it at the point of generation than to process atmospheric air.
I’m pretty sure that it’s more energy efficient to not emit a given amount of carbon dioxide by not emitting it via combustion than it is to mechanically capture and sequester it from the atmosphere once emitted.
If you can exploit some process that isn’t directly driven by human-provided energy, like iron seeding of algae, where you’re leveraging plant photosynthesis, okay, then maybe.
Also, even if you have some way of sequestering carbon dioxide, if you’re still emitting it, it’s gonna be cheaper to just capture it at the point of generation than to process atmospheric air.
Carbon capture is not meant to work. It is used to make everyone think that rich fucks actually care about the environment, when they really don’t.