If your business model cannot survive without massive influxes of government cash it might not be the most stable idea. It’s one thing if you are a defense contractor or provide specific things that government needs. But, carbon capture? It was really based on Government giving them money
Carbon Capture Comes Back Down to Earth
Six months ago, the prospects for the nascent carbon removal market seemed as vast as the sky.
Bill Gates and other investors were lining up to fund start-ups that promised to suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, helping to curb global warming. Big-name companies like Google, Airbus and Amazon moved in to buy carbon removal credits. And McKinsey projected the market could be worth as much as $1.2 trillion by 2050. One investor called it “the single greatest opportunity I’ve seen in 20 years of doing venture capital.”
But less than six months into President Trump’s second term, in which he has moved to drastically reshape climate policy, the carbon capture industry is decidedly more subdued.
The Energy Department last month terminated 24 awards worth $3.7 billion, most of which had been earmarked for carbon capture and storage projects. Applications for new carbon capture and sequestration permits in the United States were down 55 percent in the first three months of the year.
If these start ups were so great why can’t they do it without the government money? Surely Gates and the others could fund them 100% with their own money, right? Or, is it that they were looking for a big return based on Los Federales spending a ton of taxpayer money on the projects, not caring if they succeed, but, just looking good temporarily?
Yet it’s not just the political landscape that has changed. There are also new questions about the viability of some prominent carbon capture technologies.
Climeworks’ flagship plant in Iceland, which uses so-called direct air capture to scrub carbon dioxide from the sky, removed just a sliver of the carbon dioxide it had hoped to during its first 10 months in operation, according to Heimildin, an Icelandic news organization.
In other words, it’s BS. Maybe some of these projects around the world should be audited, see where the money has gone. Did it enrich some people, while doing little, just like with lots of solar projects (Solyndra, for instance)? If it is projected to be so big, then why is it failing and unable to operate without vast sums of taxpayer money, whether taxpayers like it or not?
Read: Bummer: Carbon Capture (scam) Industry Having Issues Because Trump »
Six months ago, the prospects for the nascent carbon removal market seemed

CNN, the left-leaning media conglomerate, has declared that the Mexican flag is “a defining symbol” of riots across Los Angeles, California, over Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents enforcing federal immigration laws.
The Trump administration will move Wednesday to repeal federal limits on power plant climate pollution, attacking the Biden era’s most ambitious attempt to use regulations to rein in heat-trapping gases from the electric grid, according to six people familiar with the situation.
By affecting cows’ diets, climate change can affect cheese’s nutritional value and sensory traits such as taste, color and texture. This is true at least for Cantal — a firm, unpasteurized cheese from the Auvergne region in central France, researchers report February 20 in the Journal of Dairy Science.
The Ukraine war won’t end until NATO withdraws troops from the Baltics, a top Russian official has warned.
California is suing to reverse President Donald Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to Los Angeles, arguing that the use of the military to suppress immigration protests is an illegal and unconstitutional intrusion on state authority.

