Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5101 readers

673 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

silence7@slrpnk.net

Making cement is very damaging for the climate. One solution is opening in California (apnews.com)

submitted 5 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Bluefruit@lemmy.world 18 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Fortera intercepts carbon dioxide exhaust from the kilns where cement is made and routes it back in to make additional cement. In its first effort at commercial scale, the technology is being added to a CalPortland facility in Redding, California, one of the largest cement plants in the western U.S. It opens Friday.

Fortera’s process sucks the carbon dioxide out and pipes it into a machine where it is turned into a solid. Its technology works at around 1,800°F (1,000°C), which requires less energy and emits less carbon.

When the captured carbon dioxide is mixed with calcium oxide, it turns into a kind of limestone that becomes cement-like when wet. This product, which Fortera calls ReAct, is blended with other ingredients to make concrete.

Fortera uses a 15% blend of ReAct in concrete because that is all that is allowed under existing industry standards that regulate material strength and durability.

[–] admiralteal@kbin.social 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

So it's CCS. Just another version of carbon capture. Yawn.

Way more interesting is e.g., the projects with Rondo and Titan Cement, where they are using industrial heat batteries powered by regular electricity instead of fossil fuels. With this kind of technology, you can not only reduce/eliminate emissions, but can even theoretically turn concrete production into a carbon sink through CO2 injection/mineralization (which can even improve the performance of the concrete, though current regulations don't permit pushing this to its limit in real construction yet).

That is, use use renewable energy along with CO2 gathered from any source (not limited to just CCS -- even DAC) to build stronger, better, cheaper, more environmentally-friendly concrete that creates fairly durable carbon sinks.

Seems like this whole "ReAct" thing is just trying to claim/trademark a concrete technology as their own when it really isn't.

[–] Bluefruit@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I've seen some cool stuff about heat batteries. Very interesting implementations of old technology.

Yea I wasnt sure if this was something new or not, but I'd agree that carbon capture isnt nearly as interesting as some of the new battery storage or renewable energy tech thats being developed.

[–] admiralteal@kbin.social 3 points 5 months ago

The ReAct stuff isn't new. For a more industrial example of this, check out CarbonCure. It's not yet economical, though once you include external factors like carbon credits or other tools that financially punish emissions / reward sequestration it theoretically can be. As the the tech scales up, there's every reason to think the cost of this kind of carbon-enriched concrete will at least be priced in the same league as traditional PCC.