> They are claiming it takes them 230 kWh/ton to reverse this reaction.
I don’t think that’s a claim in the article. If the carbon product was pure in the sense it could be burned again then it wouldn’t work out. But that’s not claimed. It’s not reduced to carbon!
"The reactions break the carbon dioxide into oxygen gas, as well as carbonaceous sheets which ‘float’ to the surface of the container due to differences in density and can therefore be easily extracted."
and
"According to the research team, the process showed 92% efficiency in converting a tonne of CO2, using just 230kWh of energy."
I don’t think that’s a claim in the article. If the carbon product was pure in the sense it could be burned again then it wouldn’t work out. But that’s not claimed. It’s not reduced to carbon!