
Exxon Thinks It Can Create Biofuel from Algae at Massive Scale - elsherbini
https://www.fastcompany.com/40539606/exxon-thinks-it-can-create-biofuel-from-algae-at-massive-scale
======
nathan_long
My main question was answered at the bottom:

> While a truck running on biofuel still emits greenhouse gases, the emissions
> can be considered carbon neutral since the algae sucks up CO2 as it
> grows–unlike fossil fuels, which burn carbon that has been buried for
> millions of years.

~~~
devy
Carbon neutral might not even be enough to curb major climate change
consequences like irreversible permafrost melting. [1]

We need to do much much better than that - it has to be Carbon negative - even
then, it might be too late already. [2]

[1]: [http://www.ipsnews.net/2011/02/permafrost-melt-soon-
irrevers...](http://www.ipsnews.net/2011/02/permafrost-melt-soon-irreversible-
without-major-fossil-fuel-cuts/)

[2]:
[https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/SeaIce/page3.php](https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/SeaIce/page3.php)

~~~
BenjiWiebe
Well I guess we could just store up the fuel and not burn it. That would be
carbon negative. Or ship it to Mars and burn it there as a start to terra
forming. Too bad it's hard to get stuff to Mars.

~~~
FrozenTuna
This is the answer. Not the mars thing, but creating fuel and not burning it.
We got into this mess by taking stored up CO2 and releasing it for energy. You
reverse this by taking energy and released CO2 and turning it into storable
"fuel".

~~~
castle-bravo
Would planting trees do the trick?

~~~
FrozenTuna
While it would certainly help, it would solve like 0.1% of the problem. Fun
fact, plants actually consume oxygen at night. On a 24 hour cycle, they create
more than they consume, so everyone just thinks all they do is create oxygen.

