←back to thread

173 points rbanffy | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.203s | source
Show context
mchannon ◴[] No.42127456[source]
The writer appears to be under the impression that CO2 is not a valuable commodity.

In fact, it is, so long as it's under enough pressure, and in the right place. In Montezuma County, Colorado, sits the McElmo dome, an ancient underground CO2 well. They pump it out, down a 500 mile pipeline, to Denver City, Texas, where it gooses oil wells into pumping more crude out. Other than making more oil and making it cheaper, not really much in terms of greenhouse gas contributions- the CO2 starts underground and ends up underground.

Kinder Morgan won't just let you back up your truck and buy some (it's already spoken for), and even if they would, they'd expect you to pay a pretty penny for what we widely consider to be waste gas.

I think MIT is doing some good work. Just wanted everyone to be mindful of the massive scale under which CO2 is already getting bought and sold.

replies(7): >>42127501 #>>42127714 #>>42127942 #>>42127946 #>>42128043 #>>42128376 #>>42130689 #
hn_throwaway_99 ◴[] No.42128376[source]
It the example you give, CO2 gas is not really a valuable commodity. Pressure is the valuable commodity in that example, and so it's kind of irrelevant when discussing carbon sequestration solutions.
replies(2): >>42129785 #>>42129802 #
outworlder ◴[] No.42129802[source]
Has to be both. A random gas might interact with the oil being pumped. Why don't they just use compressed air? There must be a reason why CO2 is desirable for that application.
replies(1): >>42141332 #
1. tadfisher ◴[] No.42141332[source]
It's the opposite actually; CO2 interacts with petroleum in controllable ways via pressure, so engineers can change the properties of the oil and end up extracting more oil more quickly.