26 Comments

1. 

   @user-tf2lj3xh9d

   December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

   What a crock of poo…
   I guess ya just cant fix 'STUPID'

   Reply
2. 

   @El.Duder-ino

   December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

   Simply amazing what human ingenuity can come with… we r so much and we can achieve amazing stuff. We have solutions, money, so it’s about time to change the status quo, lower greed and make green, better future.
   Don’t see better reason to put invention of money to work for all of us.

   Reply
3. 

   @hanskostka6788

   December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

   hahahaha excuses better than at a catholic church 😂😂😂 just to produce this video created more CO2 than was removed with current technology — consider all those SUVs driving to the studio ….

   Reply
4. 

   @ivak91026

   December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

   First, they spend energy to remove carbon, then they waste that energy. And they call it "helping the environment"
   Charlatans

   Reply
5. 

   @lifeleisuresa1229

   December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

   Just another money grab scheme 😂😂😂

   Reply
6. 

   @rbasr19

   December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

   We have people starving all over the planet and we're spending billions to remove the plant food from the atmosphere that would help grow more food. Or we could spend it providing clean energy for the 2 million who die each year from the effects of having to burn wood and dung in their homes. But no, we'd prefer to build this ridiculous monstrosity.

   Reply
7. 

   @benjaminwang6544

   December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

   Nonsense.Everything like you are drilling crude oil from mid-east and then inject carbon based oil into the gronund in Europe. Wasting lots of energy.

   Reply
8. 

   @user-dd7ji2zj2t

   December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

   Well there go the trees. Only needed them to live

   Reply
9. 

   @abhijitmitra4444

   December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

   Carbon dioxide is one of the major GHGs and a driver in the domain of climate change. In the drive to mitigate and adapt with the issue of climate change, carbon trading has become a vital policy instrument in majority of the countries in the World. It is also a pivotal element of the UNFCCC’s approach to tackle climate change. National or regional carbon trading schemes are now operational in many counties through a well-defined structural policy, specific for the country. Yet the trading is still in a volatile stage. Many schools think that this concept is not very realistic to combat climate change, while others consider this a strict regulation to put cap/limit on the emitters. Unfortunately, the subject is characterised by jargon, abstract concepts, mathematical formulae, and technical detail, making it hard for most people to understand its implications and evaluate its merits and demerits. This paper is a first order analysis to unravel some of this complexity by imparting thrust on three basic components – cap and trade, carbon offsets and carbon trading – which underpin the trade in carbon quotas. The case study of the highly urbanized city of Kolkata and Indian Sundarban mangrove ecosystem has been discussed in details with CO2 – e of dominant trees to analyse the probable credit that can be received from the producer communities of these two sites that are significantly different in terms of anthropogenic footprints and ecological features. CONTACT ABHIJIT MITRA

   Reply
10. 

    @johnoehrle5973

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    sequestering co2 is utterly stupid. it steals oxygen from our atmosphere which will NEVER be seen again. at least photosynthesis could and does replace the o2 from the burned oil, making it back into oil and o2, sorry, wood and o2. stop stealing our oxygen! how long would we last if we breathed and only exhaled non-co2 gases.

    Reply
11. 

    @josephlavigne1495

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    Carbon is the basis of all life on Earth……. It is the food for all plants….. The more carbon in the atmosphere, the better plants grow…… The Earth has become about 20% greener since the beginning of the industrial revolution…… Worth trillions of increased agricultural production….. The computer models have been so wrong in the past. How can you trust them in the future?…..

    Reply
12. 

    @tommyeschung

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    This is a scam

    Reply
13. 

    @user-iw6dk4nr9m

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    Yes and we have to maximize the nature based removals

    Reply
14. 

    @Buzzbonce

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    Carbon dioxide removal uses more energy than pruduced by combustion, making matters worse. The best thing is not to use combustion for power in the first place.
    Also note: for every atom of carbon removed from the atmosphere, two atoms of oxygen are removed. Within 50 years of carbon dioxide sequestration 5% of oxygen in the atmosphere will be removed, with unknown but probably dire consequences.

    Reply
15. 

    @fetB

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    greenwashing. All of this takes loads of energy and allows the legacy companies keep going

    Reply
16. 

    @dustin612

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    All life is carbon based.

    Reply
17. 

    @coleorum

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    A bit too late now. We should have been working on this 50 years ago. Hindsight is getting easier now.

    Reply
18. 

    @terryjames548

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    People wisely asked what happened to auto exhaust back in the day. Where does it go? They were told it goes up and into outer space. Lol. If only they knew the truth…..

    Reply
19. 

    @bdz_4206

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    This is the dumbest thing I've ever seen.

    Reply
20. 

    @kimlibera663

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    Mineralize the oceans & that will up the PH.

    Reply
21. 

    @kimlibera663

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    I like the indirect method better because it essentially creates artificial limestone to be injected into concrete & it makes it stronger.

    Reply
22. 

    @angelfalter9423

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    You see this people stop demanding oil gas it's destroying our home the only home we got we have to take care of it so no more gas and no more oil and no more cold it's deadly it's evil and greed pollutes the heart that's why the greedy ones we'll never get heaven God's got a special place for them when they die and it's called hell and I hope they burn for eternity for destroying our home

    Reply
23. 

    @GravefriHave

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    🧪
    “Because CO2 s an Acid” you said
    That is strange since ..
    where is the H+ (proton we called it) 🤔
    ….
    Acid:
    Such substances contain one or more hydrogen atoms that, in solution, are released as positively charged hydrogen ions (H+)

    Base:
    A substance that can take up the H+

    According to what you said, Sulfate, SO4 would also be an Acid etc.

    Just saying 🤓

    Reply
24. 

    @markpeirson7832

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    Using c02 to get oil out of the ground isn’t a negative the same amount of oil consumption will not change and will lead to less wells dug. But when talking fossil fuels a little help is absolutely no help to environmentalist. It’s all evil while they consume fossil fuels

    Reply
25. 

    @Kartel7622

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    The real problem is developing nations who haven't had thier "industrial revolution" and don't care about emissions reductions. Unless we can scale this quickly, I don't see how this is a feasible goal in the near term

    Reply
26. 

    @Teller3448

    December 19, 2023 at 1:43 am

    For every million air molecules in today’s atmosphere 400 are CO2. This average
    masks wide variation. For example, without strong ventilation, CO2 levels in crowded
    indoor spaces, such as classrooms, courtrooms, and trains, commonly reach 2,000
    ppm with no clinically documented ill effects to people. The U.S Navy strives to keep
    CO2 levels in its submarines below 5,000 ppm. On a calm summer day, CO2 concentrations in a cornfield can drop to 200 ppm, as the growing corn consumes the available CO2. At a concentration of about 150 ppm or less, many plants die of CO2 starvation.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment *

Name *

Email *

Website

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Captcha *

Type the text displayed above: