Does no one understand thermodynamics?

Here are some hints:

1. How much fossil fuel will be burned to capture how much CO2 ?
2. How much above break-even does the process achieve?

Because the process cannot break-even, it actually puts more CO2 into the air in order to ‘feel good’.

Even if the process was anywhere close to breaking even, how much can it be scaled up, and at a maximum scale, what percent of the CO2 could conceivably be captured?

Note that the article says nothing about a break-even calculation because of what it would show.

It is disgusting and shameful that anyone would entertain these schemes. Put simply, they are not even worthy of research, and I am all for scientific research.

FYI: Global oil consumption per capita is 5 barrels of oil (199 gallons) per person yearly (based on the 2016 world population of 7,464,022,049 people). That is 35,442,923,090 barrels per year, or 35,442,913,090 barrels per year, or 4 billion gallons per day.

[google.com]

[worldpopulationreview.com]

Oil refineries commonly capture CO2 from their gas streams using diethanolamine (or similar species) which absorb CO2, but then must be HEATED to release it. The hot DEA must then be cooled down again, and moving the solution around requires pumps that consume still more energy.

I tend to be a bit over optimistic, but stories like this give me a lot of hope that climate change will not become the serious issue that everyone fears.

If projects like this get scaled up then I can easily believe we could end up actively reducing the CO2 in the atmosphere and changing a point of no return into a manageable situation.