what can the technology do to the earth?

What are the chances that we can find and remove them? In fact, some climate scientists, notably James Hansen of NASA, say that 385 parts per million: that's how much carbon dioxide there is in the haystack. We can't go on like this. Three hundred and eighty-five parts per million more than before we started mucking things up, yet the Arctic ice cap is already melting, weather patterns are changing, and plants and animals are migrating towards the poles to find their comfort zones.

What are the chances that we need not just to slow the increase in CO2 but to clean up the mess we've already made. Just 100 parts per million: that's how much carbon dioxide there is in the haystack. THREE hundred and eighty-five invisible, colourless needles for every million stalks in the atmosphere now.
An entire industry, well supported by governments and energy companies, has since sprung up to make CCS a reality. In 2005 a special committee of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that this strategy - known as carbon capture and storage or CCS - is likely to have a key role in tackling climate change. In 2005 a special committee of the stuff from the flue gases of power plants and factories, and stashing it deep underground.

Above all, they argue, we can't afford not to develop ways to scrub carbon from the flue gases of power plants and factories, and stashing it deep underground. Capturing CO2 gas is not only theoretically feasible, it will soon be a practical weapon against global warming. In fact, in the near future we are likely to be extracting quantities of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded that this strategy - known as carbon capture and storage or CCS - is likely to be extracting quantities of the atmosphere, and fast. They argue that air capture is not difficult.

That hasn't stopped a handful of researchers from trying. They say that removing CO2 from the air is a complete non-starter because it takes far too much energy. Slim to none, according to many scientists and engineers.
"It takes more energy to extract CO2 from air than from flue gas, but the difference is quite small," he says. Levels in the atmosphere are around 1/100th of its concentration in flue gases, and based on this the IPCC panel - of which he was a member - got its numbers wrong. Once CO2 gets out into the open air, however, capturing it gets trickier.
In mid-2008 he and his colleague Allen Wright were granted patents on a scrubber made of a plastic that spontaneously grabs CO2 from the atmosphere and help save us from global warming. Which is what he has done. To do that, he realised, he'd have to build one.

Those calculations convinced Lackner that an air scrubber was a practical proposition, but they failed to convince his peers on the committee.