Texas energy company wins first-of-its-kind permit to suck carbon out of air, store underground

https://www.marfapublicradio.org/news/2025-04-10/texas-energy-company-wins-first-of-its-kind-permit-to-suck-carbon-out-of-air-store-underground

by zsreport

11 comments

  1. What will really get this to take off is monetizing the captured carbon for something profitable. Self incentivising with profits will get more tech and investment.

  2. Trump needs to be convinced to capture all this carbon before the rest of the world can take it.

  3. This is a farce and a waste of taxpayers money. They looked at this in England and voted it down unanimously because it’s a joke and a waste of money. This is a scam basically.

  4. Cool, another pipe dream to convince the public that we’re not all fucked in 20 years no matter what lmao.

  5. They can’t make it financially viable to take it out of a smoke stack on a coal fired power station but somehow they are just going to take it out of the air. How does that work.

  6. While I agree something needs to be done to remove that is there, but unless we push for more renewables… whats the point? This seems silly and will take more power than it would remove making a cycle demand for more fossil fuels lol. There are ways I am sure, using some chemical changes, but you still need to capture the raw carbon that comes out of the stacks than it would be to randomly do it in the air.

  7. They have done this on Island many years .
    Sucking co2 and store it underground and make new rock material

  8. This is more of a greenwash than most people are realizing in this thread.

    The captured CO2 is injected into a brine, then injected into the ground… why else do oil companies inject brines into the ground?

    Yes. This is the greenwashing of fracking. Some tiny portion of the CO2 produced when extracting oil from the ground is then injected BACK into the ground to extract MORE oil.

    Look! Now the whole thing is green!

  9. Why are they capturing CO2 from the air when there are plenty of CO2-rich sources, say, from gas power plants? About 10% of the energy you get from burning coal must be expended in order to separate CO2 from air. Why not make it more efficient by doing this injection next to a CO2 source?

  10. >Oxy’s permit application redacted certain details regarding the layers where the carbon dioxide would be stored, which only the EPA could review. She said that concealing this information gives residents no assurance that the gas will stay put, adding that the public should have been allowed to evaluate that information.

Comments are closed.