Many, including myself, don't believe that solving the climate crisis will be done, by invention of a single new technique. So I agree, scaling up this project to be the only solution would not be possible.
C02, methane, and other greenhouse gasses are produced from multiple large sources. And tackling that problem will just not happen by only using 1 solution. Any project that large would almost require some other environmental impact. We are having trouble scaling up batteries without such a consequence.(as an example)
credit_guy|2 years ago
If that's what you are trying to say, then no. Olivine still does not make sense. One ton of olivine can absorb about one ton of CO2. That means that if we produce and distribute 500 million tons of olivine, we can reduce emissions by 1%. But take a look for about 5 seconds around you. See how many things made of plastic you can identify. No matter where you are, there are dozens or hundreds of them in the same room as you. Well, all the humanity produces only about 400 million tons of plastics. Probably thousands of factories churn out plastics day and night, employing millions of people. If you replicate that in order to produce olivine, it's going to take decades, all for the ultimate result of reducing emissions by 1%. Does that make sense?
I can recite for you right now 20 things that can have a much bigger impact and require much less effort. And you can too.
PolKnops|2 years ago