With reference to ‘Direct Air Capture’, an emerging technology, which of the following statements is/are correct?

Answer: (c) I, II and III

Storage, industrial use and synthetic fuels are all DAC applications.

Statement by statement

1. ✓ CORRECT CO₂ pulled from the air can be stored underground (e.g. Climeworks Orca, Iceland).

2. ✓ CORRECT Captured CO₂ can feed chemicals and plastics, and is used in drinks carbonation and greenhouses.

3. ✓ CORRECT CO₂ + green hydrogen → synthetic e-kerosene (sustainable aviation fuel).

The idea

Ordinary carbon capture takes CO₂ from a chimney, where the gas is concentrated. Direct air capture takes it from open air, where CO₂ is only about 0.04%. That needs much more energy, so it is costly. Its advantage is that it can be built anywhere and it removes carbon already emitted.

Fans pull in air → A chemical filter holds the CO₂ → Heating the filter releases pure CO₂ → Stored deep underground, or → Used to make fuel, plastic or fizzy drinks

The trap

Using captured CO₂ in food sounds odd, but fizzy drinks already use CO₂.

Elimination technique

All three statements are soft “it can be…” claims with no absolute word. Plain claims of this kind are usually true in Environment PYQs, which points to all three.

Also know

The best-known plants are Orca and Mammoth in Iceland, which run on geothermal power and store the CO₂ in basalt rock. If the CO₂ is stored, the result is negative emissions. If it is made into fuel and burnt, the carbon returns to the air, so the result is at best carbon-neutral.