Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by lucisferre 3174 days ago
They also mention that it is considerably more efficient to capture carbon at the source. The CO2 concentration is about 200 times higher at the plant (10% vs 0.04%). They state that it costs about 1/10 as much to capture at the source.

So extrapolating from that, then the the plant they built in Switzerland, which 900 tonnes/yr directly from the air, could potentially capture 9000 tonnes/yr and would handily manage a coal power plant.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/06/switzerland-giant-new...