"A Massachusetts-based startup has figured out how to produce zero-carbon cement."
This sounds amazing and it's huge if it can be scaled (cement production currently causes 8% of global carbon emissions), but the article is basically an uncritical press release.
Anyone familiar with the subject: what are the downsides, if any?
For example, I'm curious if the feed materials are commonly and sustainably available, not that they're very open about what materials they're using.
"One electrode produces a solution that extracts calcium from inert minerals, leaving behind a reactive silicate. The second electrode produces alkalinity, which precipitates calcium (also known as lime) as a pure, reactive solid."
@Brendanjones
That interview with CEO is sales not analysis. No reason to believe any claims. Obstacles that remain before making it economically, environmentally and mechanically sustainable? Material properties? How do properties change with wear, weather, and stress? Has it been vibe/earthquake/life tested? How much more expensive will the first batch be? What is its price/strength/life right now, out of the lab? Why isn't it selling itself?
@NatureMC Their website it quite minimal but there's way more info about the process in this article. It's actually a fascinating and educational interview, I can recommend giving the whole thing a listen/read: https://www.volts.wtf/p/we-are-closing-in-on-zero-carbon
@NatureMC "nobody can produce alternatives on an industrial level" indeed, Sublime included. I too am casting a skeptical eye at this. But it is promising that they have an actual plant in the works to test it at scale, so it's not all talk.
@accretionist on cost: "So 80% of the total installed cost of concrete is labor, and it's often unionized labor.
The cement is 10% of that, and the aggregate is the remaining 10% so even if we were to charge a two to four x green premium, really, it doesn't really affect the overall cost of a building that much."
Add comment