r/europe • u/nimicdoareu Romania • 10h ago
News Europe’s largest carbon capture facility officially inaugurated at Yara Sluiskil in the Netherlands
https://www.yara.com/corporate-releases/europes-largest-carbon-capture-facility-officially-inaugurated-at-yara-sluiskil-in-the-netherlands/•
u/Spare-Builder-355 4h ago
The captured CO₂ will be transported by ship to Norway
lol, capturing CO2 while burning heavy fuel oil to transport it.
•
u/BattleGrown Germany 4h ago
But with scrubbers, the pollution goes into the water instead of the air!
•
u/really_nice_guy_ Austria 2h ago
Yes putting the co2 into the water where it will stay for the next couple hundred years is MUCH better than being in the air where they get heated up by sunlight and act as a greenhouse gas.
•
u/__dat_sauce 6h ago
Carbon capture is a green washing dead end like hydrogen in cars was.
It makes no economic or environmental sense. But judging by the downvotes on the opinions that align with the science, I guess the industry is astroturfing reddit as well
•
u/NoAssignment316 3h ago
Well feel free to sue them under the greenwashing directive then
•
u/__dat_sauce 3h ago
Sure let me just cash out my ETF's should be on the news next week.
•
u/NoAssignment316 3h ago
Wouldn't be that expensive, especially as you, from the boldness of your claim, already have all the proof that they are greenwashing. Just need to show the EC your proof and they'll handle it for you
•
u/__dat_sauce 2h ago
•
u/NoAssignment316 2h ago
Oh, so a different case and situation then. Can you now provide the calculations for this case? Or are you gonna show your article to the EC and expect them to take you seriously? If not, then why should anyone else take you seriously?
•
u/__dat_sauce 2h ago
You are absolutely right I am sure this plant will be extremely efficient and provide a pathway for the Oil & Gas industry to continue polluting.
I look forward to the years to come.
•
u/NoAssignment316 2h ago
Oh I would love to see them do more and if they're not fulfilling their claims they should be taken down a peg. I just don't think talking out of your ass is the way to go about it
•
•
u/34BoringT_ Norway 4h ago
What I am worried about here is that this doesn't quite add up.
If we were to construct a perfect CCS facility and covered the entire earth with it, how much CO2 would it actually pull out of the atmosphere, compared to our yearly consumption?
•
u/DoomSnail31 8h ago
I wonder if the inventors of the steam train also looked at the amount of horse and carriages worldwide, and concluded that this was no use.
•
u/JP76 10h ago
This seems like trying to stop Titanic from sinking by hand bailing with a kiddie bucket, all the while passing ships dump their ballast and wastewater on your head.
•
u/Mortiferous12 North Brabant (Netherlands) 9h ago
It does.. but what do you propose? Do nothing? Or try to get as much people / countries to help save said ship?
•
•
u/MWalshicus 9h ago
That's the attitude the let's countries like China, who aren't defeatist, gain advantages over us. Things scale if you put time and effort into them. Look at solar, which went from being expensive to cheap.
There is to much CO2 in the atmosphere.
We have the technology to reduce that by capturing it source, or using surplus energy to extract it from the atmosphere and store it.
The most obvious thing in the world would be to massively increase our use of renewables and use the excess energy that cannot be stored to run sequestration.
•
u/JP76 7h ago
You know nothing about my attitude and I'm well aware there is too much CO2 in the atmosphere.
Do you understand the scale? For instance, in 2024, worldwide CO2 emissions were 38.6 billion tons. Net largest contributors are (in order) China, USA, India and EU. Per capita largest contributors are United States, Canada, China and South Africa.
Out of these countries, US federal government is trying to move backwards, India is still very much growing and will need more energy and the same goes for China.
We in EU can only control our emissions. Yes, it's good we're able to cut emissions, but it won't stop the climate change.
We would need to change how we live, to make a real difference and since it seems too hard for some people to switch to paper straws, that change isn't likely.
•
u/MWalshicus 6h ago
We are awash with energy we do not collect. Energy we could use to undo the geo-engineering we have already done. We already have days where we produce more energy than we can consume. This surplus needs to be put to use.
Scale is always daunting at the start, but we have seen time and again how scale is overcome - through persistence and investment.
•
u/JP76 6h ago
If we stopped emissions now, it would take thousands of years for CO2 to return to pre-industrial levels. Some of the changes are already permanent. You're talking about science fiction, which at this point is as useful as hoping there's a god that will fix this shit.
This is from Royal Society:
If emissions of greenhouse gases stopped altogether, global surface temperature would stop increasing but it would not significantly decline on human time scales. It would take many thousands of years for atmospheric CO2 to return to “pre-industrial” levels due to its very slow transfer to the deep ocean and ultimate burial in ocean sediments. Surface temperatures would stay elevated for at least a thousand years, implying a long-term commitment to a warmer than pre-industrial planet due to past emissions. Sea level would likely continue to rise for many centuries even after temperature stopped increasing
This would be the case in the very unlikely scenario that we would be able to stop all emissions. On the contrary, and despite EU and US trending down, world is trending up with emissions.
In 1924, the entire world emitted 3.72 billion tons. In 1988, when climatologist James E. Hansen testified) in US senate about climate change, world emitted 21.9 billion tons. During his testimony, Hansen said the following:
I would like to draw three main conclusions. Number one, the earth is warmer in 1988 than at any time in the history of instrumental measurements. Number two, the global warming is now large enough that we can ascribe with a high degree of confidence a cause and effect relationship to the greenhouse effect. And number three, our computer climate simulations indicate that the greenhouse effect is already large enough to begin to effect the probability of extreme events such as summer heat waves.
In 2024, world emissions were 38.6 billion tons and US alone emitted 4.9 billion tons and China 12.3 billion tons. EU emitted 2.43 billion tons. EU could cut its emissions to zero and on global scale, we would be still trending up. There was a one recent event that made a noticeable dent on this trend and that was covid.
•
u/MWalshicus 5h ago
Chinese emissions have likely peaked, and the scale of their renewable rollout and electrification is astounding. The world is transitioning to renewables/battery faster than anticipated. US foreign policy has pushed governments to electrify what can be electrified and there has never been a greater *economic* incentive to decarbonise.
Again, we are awash with energy that is not collected. With current technology, we have the capacity reduce atmospheric CO2 to pre-industrial levels over a human lifespan. This does not account for efficiencies that would come from scale and investment into sequestration.
This requires action. It requires investment. It requires us actually using the energy that is otherwise lost. We geo-engineered our current situation as a side-effect. We can geo-engineer our way out of it.
If countries like China listened to people like yourself, we'd never have seen the solar/battery revolution, instead wallowing in the kind of defeatism that only an oil executive could desire.
•
u/EmptyVolition242 Germany 10h ago
What a waste of resources. Imagine if that money was actually us d to build memory or chip fabs.
•
u/Propofolly 10h ago
We should go further! Think about the profits if we replace all the farms with chip fabs! Our children and grandchildren will solve that pesky climate problem anyway. They'll have it worse so they have to solve it, right? </s>
You could perhaps argue other climate related industries might be a better bang for our buck, but comparing it to a chip fab is apples to oranges, man...
•
u/CulturalLaw8072 India 10h ago edited 10h ago
take a look at how the ice caps of the Alps are melting. such investments are not a waste of resource. these investments prevent further melting of the ice caps. didn't you see what happened in Nepal? in my opinion Europe is the only responsible power on earth that gives an F about climate change.
•
u/lee1026 10h ago
How many degrees would this project add up to?
•
u/AncientSeraph 9h ago
This is like saying the first solar panel was useless because its contribution to power generation was negligible.
•
•
u/Tenocticatl 9h ago
Interesting that you're saying this about decarbonizing tech and not military production, for example.
•
u/doodmakert 7h ago
who the fuck needs memory of chip fabs when the fucking country is burning every summer?
•
u/morbihann Bulgaria 10h ago
What is the carbon cost of running it ?
•
u/Tenocticatl 9h ago
Article doesn't say, probably because those are variable depending on the grid that powers the capturing process. I think there are probably more cost-effective ways to decarbonize agricultural processes, but I don't have a better idea for reducing the emissions of fertilizer production specifically.
•
u/SarcoZQ North Brabant (Netherlands) 10h ago
Probably less
•
u/SgtFinnish Like Holland but better 9h ago
Man could you imagine if it weren't? The eggheads would be kicking themselves!
•
u/morbihann Bulgaria 9h ago edited 6h ago
Like the number of solar roadways that were funded that ended up being so inefficient ( oh who could have guessed ) and were terrible roads as well ?
EDIT: yeah, downvote me for calling out "green" projects that turn out to be predictibly total scams.
•
u/morbihann Bulgaria 9h ago
Ok, so what is it ?
•
u/me-need-more-brain 7h ago
Linde Engineering to Deliver World-Scale Coastal CO2 Liquefaction Plant to Yara | A Linde Company
" It currently produces around 3.2 million tons of CO2 each year, of which 1.4 million tons finds application in commercial greenhouses, carbonated drinks, and urea for NOx removal in diesel engines. Currently approximately 1.8 million tons each year of CO2 are emitted to the atmosphere. Linde’s plant will liquify roughly 50 percent of the total CO2 emissions that are not utilized elsewhere."
Energy source is natural gas, it produces fertilizer, so of course.
•
u/nimicdoareu Romania 10h ago
Yara Sluiskil, Europe’s largest ammonia and fertilizer plant can capture and liquefy up to 800,000 tons of CO₂ annually from ammonia production thereby avoiding carbon taxation on these volumes. The CO₂ will be transported by ship to Norway, where it will be permanently stored beneath the seabed by Northern Lights.
With the right framework conditions in place, the project is expected to capture and store around 12 million tons of CO₂ over the next 15 years, making a significant contribution to European climate goals and industrial transformation.