this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2024
183 points (94.6% liked)

Technology

58451 readers
6215 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] abhibeckert@lemmy.world 24 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

Convince me otherwise

Hydrogen, released directly into the atmosphere, interacts with methane and increases it's half life. And since Methane is 50x more powerful as a greenhosue gas than CO2... that's bad.

When you "burn" hydrogen, on the other hand, you're converting it into water. Which is obviously harmless.

So, capturing this hydrogen wouldn't just be "carbon free" it would potentially be "carbon negative" at least in terms of it's actual actual impact on climate change which is generally what people mean when they talk about carbon these days.

Hydrogen in out atmosphere is generally not a big problem, so it doesn't get talked about much at all... but if you're going to talk about the greenhouse gasses to install an mining rig... then you are getting into territory where that type of thing is significant.

Trust me, it doesn't take much energy (and therefore not much carbon) to produce a mine to extract more energy. If it did nobody would ever do it.

[–] Noodle07@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Damn, you got em

[–] HerrBeter@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Water too is a powerful greenhouse gas and burning hydrogen in cars isn't a perfect combustion.

I feel it's lying to call it carbon negative but I can see companies trying to portrait it as lucratively as possible