Direct conversion of CO2 to solid carbon by Gallium-based liquid metals

Re:Direct conversion of CO2 to solid carbon by Gallium-based... by dataflow on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @07:41AM (#29992851)

Why do we need to go carbon-negative? Because the atmosphere already has too much CO2, and reducing net emissions to 0 means that CO2 will stay there. We've emitted that CO2 in the course of (say) 300 years but need to pull it down in (say) < 50 years, hence we need to pull it down much faster than we emitted it.

Not sure if that answered your question or if you meant something else.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Direct conversion of CO2 to solid carbon by Gallium-based... by elzbardico on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @10:22AM (#29994746)

Yes, but what I wanted to know is if we kept the current concentrations would temeperature keep rising or would it stay basically the same as it is today.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Direct conversion of CO2 to solid carbon by Gallium-based... by ummonk on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @01:42PM (#29998071)

It would stay the same. And nature would reduce current concentrations back to normal over the next few centuries.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Direct conversion of CO2 to solid carbon by Gallium-based... by czbond on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @09:44AM (#29994168)

Thanks - that did help me.

[ Parent | on HN ]