| There is essentially no way this operation ends up with less carbon in the atmosphere. It is very hard to do anything with biomass at industrial scale without emitting more carbon than the biomass itself contains. Even look at biomass to energy, by the time harvest, transport, and process a tree for use to "offset" fossil fuel combustion, it's hard to say thats carbon negative. Now you harvest the biomass, put it through some chemical engineering process to make a binder product, put this binder product in the hopper of some massive diesel powered behemoth machine that chews up, binds, and compacts and remakes roads. This obviously consumes a LOT of energy. Is it a cool company? Yes, making effective nontoxic product out of another industries byproduct, to be used in something thats been foundational to human society for 1000s of years, roads, is maybe the neatest new company I've heard about in a long time. Does it emit less carbon than some other ways of repaving roads? probably. Is it carbon negative by ANY definition? OBVIOUSLY not (or I will eat my hat and throw an egg on my face.) I'm honestly confused why there's ANY claim of being carbon negative, let alone it being front and center, when the underlying product can totally stand on its own?? |