92
Google Deploying Huge CO2 Battery Facilities with Company Energy Dome (futurism.com)
submitted 10 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
19 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -23 points 10 months ago (12 children)

Great. So we'll waste energy capturing and compressing a useless gas, then we'll just release that into the atmosphere when it's capitalistically convenient? Brilliant. Great work, Google. You've really gone green. /s

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 44 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    The co2 used is a fixed amount that resides in a closed loop and never gets released to make the battery work.

    Try not to make a fool of yourself next time or you'll damage the ideals you are fighting for.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 13 points 10 months ago* (2 children)

    let’s assume 100% of this CO2 was generated from fossil fuels and eventually will be released into the atmosphere.

    is that any less green than grid storage batteries built from massive amounts of mined metals with an enormous CO2 footprint?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago

    From the IEEE article

    If the worst happens and the dome is punctured, 2,000 tonnes of CO2 will enter the atmosphere. That’s equivalent to the emissions of about 15 round-trip flights between New York and London on a Boeing 777. “It’s negligible compared to the emissions of a coal plant,” Spadacini says. People will also need to stay back 70 meters or more until the air clears, he says.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago* (3 children)

    If you want to fight for something, please learn what you stand behind.

    Battery facilities is the next step in green energy, and I like to see different approaches to this. That is what we need right now.

    Will this turn out to be a worse option than what will be invented in 10 years? Almost 100% sure. But did it help us getting to a better place? Yes.

    Fuck Google for alot of things though, but it doesnt make sense to do blind hate when they try these things.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    If you want to fight for something, please learn what you stand behind.

    And how do you know I haven't? Do you have insight into my mind?

    Here's my stance: Fuck Google. When have they ever done anything for the benefit of humanity? If this turns out to do exactly what it says on the tin, I'll be happy to eat my words, but pardon me if I don't believe that Google is suddenly interested in clean energy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 child)

    And lets take a step back to see the forest for the trees and realize the destination for this energy is more AI slop with little to no use for anyone.

    It's like celebrating some company deciding to use EV bulldozers to demolish the Amazon rainforest.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago

    Exactly. It would have been better for them to put their money towards not generating CO2 in the first place. Batteries are nothing special, and they're signing off on this project so they can appear green, because it uses CO2.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent