this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
267 points (96.8% liked)

Technology

58131 readers
5839 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemm.ee
L4s@lemmy.world
fry@fry.gs
L3s@fry.gs
enu@lemmy.world
L4s@fry.gs
267
In a U.S. First, a Commercial Plant Starts Pulling Carbon From the Air (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 10 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
41 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I feel like you could do both? carbon capture facility underground with trees ontop and intakes poking through the ground? Wouldn't even have to burry the facility just build it with a heavy duty roof garden in mind.

[–] sunbeam60@lemmy.one 2 points 10 months ago

Tree roots down far. You definitely could not run carbon sequestering underneath.

But then again, why would you? Why even bother with sucking it out of the air if trees are so much cheaper? And the added benefit is that you’ll be rewilding land, so it impacts biodiversity too.