https://pdfupload.io/docs/558ad98d
"BASF is in the business of molecules. As the world’s biggest chemicals firm,
with operations in more than 90 countries, it makes a lot of them. When those
molecules contain carbon atoms (and a great many do—they are a wonderfully
versatile resource) those carbon atoms tend to come from fossil fuels. When
their manufacture requires high temperatures, which is also often the case,
that heat comes from burning fossil fuels. Until recently BASF’s massive plant
in Ludwigshafen in Germany accounted for 4% of the country’s entire consumption
of natural gas.
Conventional wisdom has it that such a firm cannot really hope to lower very
much the number of carbon-dioxide molecules it creates in the course of its
business. The path to decarbonisation will come instead from gathering up those
molecules and disposing of them underground, a process known as carbon capture
and storage (CCS). The same conventional wisdom holds that if BASF were to
swear off burning molecules of gas to create heat, the obvious green
alternative would be to burn hydrogen molecules instead. Those molecules would
have to be manufactured, too, in an energy-intensive process.
That is why the recent declaration by Martin Brudermüller, the boss of BASF,
that “the decarbonisation of energy-intensive industries can only be achieved
through electrification” sounds, to many ears, like heresy. Electricity is for
houses and light bulbs and maybe even for cars, but not for heavy industries
built around burning heroic quantities of fossil fuel. Yet Dr Brudermüller is
not alone."
Via
Fix the News:
https://fixthenews.com/274-beautiful-confusion-billion-years/
Cheers,
*** Xanni ***
--
mailto:xanni@xanadu.net Andrew Pam
http://xanadu.com.au/ Chief Scientist, Xanadu
https://glasswings.com.au/ Partner, Glass Wings
https://sericyb.com.au/ Manager, Serious Cybernetics
