this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2025
270 points (98.2% liked)
Technology
77899 readers
3263 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Thats not what this is regardless of what you'd personally like it to be. You're showing clearly that you're poorly educated on electricity generation.
As per Energy Dome:
these people are straight-up lying, how can CO2 be "eco-friendly" when all its industrial extraction processes involve fossil fuels as a source? notice how they didn't mention who their gas supplier is? that's because it would out them and their lies.
it's impossible to buy gas turbines without ultimately funding the fossil fuel giants. also let's not ignore the environmental catastrophe that would happen if these were deployed en masse and a corruption scandal like the Beirut port explosion happened.
it's also not lost on me that this technology is being deployed in poor, economically exploited areas like Sardinia and Xinjiang. there's a reason why they're not building bubbles in the middle of Rome or Beijing, because the people would revolt at this eyesore of a ticking time bomb. nobody would give a fuck if thousands of Uyhurs died in a mass asphyxiation event because people are already ignoring the genocide they're going through.
it's concerning whenever Google gets excited about a new energy solution because we all know how they treat the environment around their data centers. if deployed, they'd use the hot breath bubbles to excuse their seemingly infinite energy consumption increase in order to keep the AI bubble from popping. this is carbon credits all over again, they'll use the CO2 to deploy more methane gas turbines because these would "cancel them out".
edit: removed inaccurate claim about Energy Dome in Xinjiang, added context
You understand this isnt about a new way to generate electricity right? This is about a new way to store it. The generation side of these is tiny and it's a closed loop system. The CO2 is in a CLOSED LOOP system meaning its not going to be leaching into the atmosphere. The issue with many renewables is they can't operate well in swings. Thats why electricity price is constantly fluctuating, because the demand is. So a sustainable way to store renewable generated energy will be able to accommodate those swings in demand in a way plain solar panels/wind/hydro alone can't. The CO2 is likely harvested directly from the atmosphere. Once the battery has X amount of CO2 it no longer needs more because again, its a closed loop. Clearly you have issues politically with the company, that can't be helped. But you don't know what you're talking about.
Edit- the CO2 COULD be harvested from the atmosphere using DAC. The currently used CO2 is coming from an unnamed company with no clearly stated source. Industrial CO2 mostly comes from the creation of hydrogen and ammonia, both chemicals we NEED to survive. The excess very pure CO2 from this process is the majority of what is considered globally as "industrial CO2". So, a waste product is being used that would otherwise be released to the atmosphere, used in industry or stored.
yeah, sure thing buddy. the CO2 will be in a closed loop until it won't. just like Fukushima and Chernobyl were supposed to be closed loop systems, until they weren't. disasters happen, no matter how much the techbro mindset insists that they're impossible.
LMAO, the audacity of telling me I don't know how electricity generation works when you don't even know how to read. they're using industrial CO2 derived from fossil fuels
So you're against nuclear power too? If that's the case I'll double down on my previous statements. Being anti nuclear is simply being dumb. Tell me about how CO2 is sourced and explain how you're saying its being sourced by burning fossil fuels. What other industries use CO2 as part of process? Have you looked into CO2, how its captured, used and its necessity at all? Again, this is something I can tell you have a very surface understanding of with no problem being vocally ignorant.
So you concern is the ecological impact should this bubble fail and the entirety of the CO2 is released to the atmosphere as pollution? Did you even read the article? They discuss that.
First, a full on failure would be rare. Then, a full on failure of 100% loss of the closed loop CO2 is equivalent to 15 round trip flights of a jet flying from New York to London. To put it in perspective there about 250+ flights of this length per day from London, with many being much much farther.
So you're comparing the impacts of a once in a lifetime nuclear power plant failure to the impacts of another source 1/16th of something that already happens every in one airport. Your logic is why out of whack on this if this is your concern with the bubble.