Half a pound of this powder can remove as much CO2 from the air as a tree

[kazinator]

> As it entered the tube, the Berkeley air contained CO2 in concentrations ranging from 410 ppm to 517 ppm. When it came out the other side, the scientists could not detect any carbon dioxide at all, Zhou said.

This sounds like it could be the basis for a respirator-like breathing apparatus, not requiring tanks, for entering and staying in enclosed spaces where the concentration of CO2 is high. (Provided there is enough oxygen.)

[hansvm]

That feels super dangerous. CO2 is mostly fine to breathe, but it triggers the impulse to breathe. Without it you won't feel that you're running out of oxygen.

[tredre3]

Might be cool to have this in an office or school classes. I realize that proper ventilation is the real fix, but it's not realistic to rebuild all buildings.

Just think about it, you have a decorative box in your office that absorbs CO2, would it slow the inevitable cognitive decline that happens when you close your door in your poorly ventilated room?

[UniverseHacker]

I suspect that previously acceptable building designs now cause cognitive decline because of much higher outdoor CO2 levels- it’s a bigger problem than people realize. I live in a mild climate where I can just keep the windows open year round- but when the neighbors have a loud party I close them to focus or sleep and CO2 will quickly climb to over 2000ppm, well over the 1400 or so that causes measurable negative effects. I suspect most people in climates that require heating or cooling are almost permanently experiencing reduced cognition and might not know.

[ZeroGravitas]

I think that I shall never see

A half a pound of powder as lovely as a tree. -- Joyce Kilmer

[doctorwho42]

So it acts like a reusable CO2 trap, then releases said CO2 at the cost of heating it up to 140F. Which then releases it.

It doesn't really talk about how you would sequester the gaseous CO2 other than "put it underground."... But if you put a gas underground it will eventually leak out. Even a liquid is prone to leak out eventually due to plate techtonics, but a liquid doesn't immediately turn into gaseous CO2.

So though a crucial technology, I don't see how effective it would be in a long term solution.

[BizarroLand]

If you can extract ~100% pure CO2 from the powder, then it might be feasible to develop a process that can convert very dense CO2 into Carbon and Oxygen.

Carbon is about 3/8ths of the total weight of a CO2 molecule and is solid and relatively inert at room temperature and pressure.

Of course, if there were a convenient way to simply strip carbon off of a CO2 molecule to begin with that would be the ideal system, but I'm sure that can be figured out given enough opportunity.

Plants do it, after all. It's not impossible.

[jjk166]

Many common minerals like olivine react with CO2 at high concentrations to form carbonates which are geologically stable. The issue is getting the high carbon concentrations to make this process fast. Concentrating CO2 is the major technical hurdle of carbon sequestration.

[floxy]

>how you would sequester the gaseous CO2 other than "put it underground."

I wonder if there is a reason you couldn't just sequester the powder. Probably too expensive? Or not volume efficient?

>to leak out eventually due to plate techtonics

This might seem shortsighted, but I'm OK pushing the problem out by 50 million years or so.

[7speter]

What I'm about to say may sound absurd and an attempt to be funny, but I'm being serious.

The other day I was wondering how people always talk about sending undesirable material (garbage, spent radioactive fuel, etc.) on a one way trip to the sun. Why not send things to the surface of Venus? It has an ultra dense atmosphere that pulverizes anything that reaches the surface. In the case of this material, it's just more C02, which is what the atmosphere of Venus is already primarily composed of. We aren't going to ever explore the surface of Venus, or at least we won't for thousands, if not millions of years, barring we can easily convert co2 into energy, so is this a bad idea?

[lux]

Sharing this for the community's take on whether it has potential or is just another non-viable option.

[r2_pilot]

It seems like it's a MOF amine approach which does have some benefits against the MEA used in submarines, such as lower corrosive properties potentially, lower heating requirements as you don't have to heat an aqueous solution, and it can be easier to discard the remnants once its co2 absorbing properties are diminished.

[Ancalagon]

Wondering how inert and/or toxic this stuff is. Could you mass produce it and just sprinkle it across the arctic? Sequester carbon and have it locked up in the permafrost.

[LorenDB]

https://archive.ph/JPmvj