6 Comments
User's avatar
Open Insights's avatar

Not enough land and that’s even if you don’t factor the carbon sink issue (ie trees suck in CO2 when they grown but release it when they die/forest fire/etc).

Expand full comment
AncientSion's avatar

I would say the market assigns zero value to it because its coming to reality that climate change is MOSTLY a huge scam and just as the EV transition is failing and will fail, the market is foreshadowing that sucking co2 out of the air is probably not a relevant thing going into the future. You know what they say, slowly, then at all once.

Look how popular sentiment in regards to EV and for example Nuclear has shifted in only a few years.

Give it 2-3 more years of high inflation and ppl will ask even more question about "climate change being the most pressing issue of our time, even above nuclear war" (paraphrasing Biden i believe)

thanks for sharing though.

Expand full comment
Lake H Cap's avatar

I know I'm late here, but interesting article and work OI! Have to say, that slide of reducing cost of capture over time has me feeling a little nauseous, reminds me a bit of the famous WeWork profitability slide..

Expand full comment
Open Insights's avatar

I'd agree with you normally on that Lake, though one would think they'll get more efficient operationally as time goes on, and with greater scale/experience. It's not unlike Cheniere and its LNG trains, at first they didn't run them that efficiently, but post-Souki, and with Jake Fusco, who came from utilities, running them, the nickel and dimes added up. Just need the right management team in place for that business silo ( to run those types of things).

Expand full comment
V3's avatar

Close to zero value

Expand full comment
MarketWatts's avatar

What a waste of money ...how about they just plant trees ????

Expand full comment