Nov 26, 2023·edited Nov 26, 2023Liked by Melanie Newfield
Several months ago, an environmental reporter I respect working for a major newspaper reported on a project to increase take up of CO2 in seawater by electrolyzing it. The story was based on a preprint. As electrochemistry was my thing for many years, I dug in.
In a nutshell, there's a cell with a membrane. The cathode compartment becomes more alkaline, so can absorb more CO2. The anode compartment releases chlorine. Not good. A future version will release oxygen, but will become more acidic. No problem, neutralize it. With lime. Which is made by heating limestone to drive off...CO2! The truth was buried under pages of distractions.
This project is a startup based on research at a major state university, where the principal works. They've received $27 million in funding from a tech billionaire's wife's foundation. It's the 11th such - carbon capture and storage startup the same individual has started. They have all failed.
There is an almost infinite amount of money available from the federal government, foundations, an above all fossil fuel companies to keep the illusion of carbon capture and storage alive. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
The university administrators turn an blind eye and just see the dollars.
I fear that any field that attracts that kind of money is also going to attract charlatans.
This was a GREAT article Melanie. It is an example of your illuminating a topic we all should be aware of. Your software reference sounds great. I would imagine there is much greater incidence of errors in published articles NOTED than before. I wonder how much is due to the increased diligence that is possible with software checking. I would imagine not many went back and reviewed my masters thesis. I am relieved :) I think the Zotero is a GREAT EXAMPLE of our increased capacity to be sure of our references. Seems a bit of a technology war. Copying and falsification might be easier than ever. Checking for errors is easier than ever. A bit of an arms race. I only hope that we can embrace the hope that people are basically good.
Very helpful Melanie, thanks. Longer comment to follow.
I downloaded Zotero! Hoping it will work well for reading AI papers and climate-related papers. Thanks, Melanie!
Several months ago, an environmental reporter I respect working for a major newspaper reported on a project to increase take up of CO2 in seawater by electrolyzing it. The story was based on a preprint. As electrochemistry was my thing for many years, I dug in.
In a nutshell, there's a cell with a membrane. The cathode compartment becomes more alkaline, so can absorb more CO2. The anode compartment releases chlorine. Not good. A future version will release oxygen, but will become more acidic. No problem, neutralize it. With lime. Which is made by heating limestone to drive off...CO2! The truth was buried under pages of distractions.
Best case, it's round tripping CO2. Worse case, it's carbon positive.
This project is a startup based on research at a major state university, where the principal works. They've received $27 million in funding from a tech billionaire's wife's foundation. It's the 11th such - carbon capture and storage startup the same individual has started. They have all failed.
There is an almost infinite amount of money available from the federal government, foundations, an above all fossil fuel companies to keep the illusion of carbon capture and storage alive. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
The university administrators turn an blind eye and just see the dollars.
I fear that any field that attracts that kind of money is also going to attract charlatans.
Ugh. I don’t know how you parse out what’s true and what isn’t given that even Retraction Watch seems to have bias. http://www.experimentjournal.com/sites/default/files/2019-05/Jaime%20A.%20Teixeira%20da%20Silva%2C%20The%20Experiment%2C%202016.%2C%20Vol.38%20%283%29%2C%202306-2309.pdf
This was a GREAT article Melanie. It is an example of your illuminating a topic we all should be aware of. Your software reference sounds great. I would imagine there is much greater incidence of errors in published articles NOTED than before. I wonder how much is due to the increased diligence that is possible with software checking. I would imagine not many went back and reviewed my masters thesis. I am relieved :) I think the Zotero is a GREAT EXAMPLE of our increased capacity to be sure of our references. Seems a bit of a technology war. Copying and falsification might be easier than ever. Checking for errors is easier than ever. A bit of an arms race. I only hope that we can embrace the hope that people are basically good.
These are wonderful resources, Melanie -- thank you so much for this deep dive!