• A_norny_mousse@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Apart from the questionable practice of buying CO2 credits (or whatever the practice is called), pumping shit underground does not seem like the best way to save the ecosphere. It could’ve produced energy and/or useful products in various ways but oh no, that would have been too expensive.

    This prevents it from being dumped at a waste disposal site, where it would eventually decompose and release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

    This is the only reason this practice is deemed carbon-emission-friendly. Color me skeptical.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 month ago

      My first thought was…how is this a good thing, we get a lot of our water from ground water…and now we’re pumping toxic shit into the ground. The fuck

      • A_norny_mousse@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Devil’s advocate says: 5000 ft is probably below groundwater level. But tbh idk. Hell, they could even use spent oil reservoirs.

        • remotelove@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          use spent oil reservoirs

          Ok, that lead to some giggles thinking about some company drilling in the future thinking they were about to hit a strangely untapped oil field.

          Add a hundred years of methane pressure build up and that could be really interesting gusher.

  • mazzilius_marsti@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 month ago

    so the AI stuff causes too much CO2, instead of fixing their own hardware, the best they could do is to offset that CO2 amount by burying shit?

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yes, burying fertilizer traps biomass CO2 and then they can use that as carbon credit equivalent to claim CO² neutrality.
      Of course, there’s a reason why fertilizer is an inexpensive source of fixated carbon biomass and this means all fertilizer will increase in price by the amount value of it’s CO2 carbon credit equivalent

      Then maybe the buried fertilizer will become so valuable that it can be dug out and sold as fertilizer again.

      I don’t see any problems with this plan !

      • Jhex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Then maybe the buried fertilizer will become so valuable that it can be dug out and sold as fertilizer again.

        I don’t see any problems with this plan !

        except the part the planet may be uninhabitable for humans by then due to the massive CO2 we are spewing to get slop from AI…

        other than that, no problem at all

        • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Sure, sure but !

          “Yes, the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders.”

      • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Then maybe the buried fertilizer will become so valuable that it can be dug out and sold as fertilizer again.

        Between the methane that generates and easily obtained phosphorous trapped down there, that’s strictly a matter of time, unfortunately.

    • Jhex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s poetic… MS AI slings out massive amounts of shit and now the company gets to bury some of it to compensate

  • rycee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    What about the nutrients in the waste? Why not compost it, capture the methane offgassing, and store that?

    • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      using human waste as fertilizer isn’t a good idea.

      human waste contains everything that a person has consumes. this includes disease causing pathogens and parasites.

      if it were to be used as a fertilizer it would need to go through multiple stages of expensive processing and testing to ensure safety. it’s far more cost effective and safer to use food by-product like fish cuttings to create fertilizers.

      • Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Engineer here. We arent talking about directly tossing it on fields. We are talking about having it be anaerobically fermented at high temperatures for about 30 days, with the biogas captured and used for energy.

        the new thing to do then is burn the remains and recover the phosphate from the ashes, where certainly no biological threat remains

        These type of plants are currently built on many larger wastewater treatment plants in Europe

        • kinther@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          I’m curious how much phosphate we would be able to capture with this method?

          I know it is a critical resource we are flushing away daily and -SHOULD- be doing this. Just like peak oil there is a concept of peak phosphorous.

          • Saleh@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 month ago

            In the EU recovering phosphor from wastewater could cover about one third of the EU countries total phosphor demands.

            This is why the EU made tge strategic decision to have such recovery systems developed and built.

      • squaresinger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 month ago

        Not to forget: It contains a ton of medicine as well. If you want to have antibiotics in your salad, use human waste as fertilizers.

      • rycee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        Treated waste water sludge is very commonly used here in Sweden albeit using anaerobic digestion rather than regular composting. High temperature composting would kill any pathogens so you can absolutely get permission to use a composting waste system in small scales. For larger scale waste treatment it is with anaerobic digestion, as mentioned.

        The captured methane is typically used for fuel, e.g., in public transport.

        As far as I know the sludge used for fertilizer needs to be certified under something called REVAQ. Some controversy does exist surrounding safe levels of the various harmful substances and perhaps PFAS in particular.

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      But what do you do with the methane, can’t story it and if you burn it, you release the CO² which was the point of burying fertilizer while it’s CO² carbon credit value is less than the price of the fertilizer itself.

  • zod000@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m surprised they had to outsource that as they have been producing so much shit for decades.

  • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    “To reach the golden temple you and your companions must first pass through the vast Caverns of Corruption.”