Researchers have developed porous materials that can soak up 80 times their volume of carbon dioxide, offering the tantalizing possibility that the greenhouse gas could be cheaply scrubbed from power-plant smokestacks. After the carbon dioxide has been absorbed by the new materials, it could be released through pressure changes, compressed, and, finally, pumped underground for long-term storage. The "pumping it underground" part is obviously still an issue, because
"What are you going to do with millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide that is not nearly as compact as nuclear waste?". And what happens if the pipe-line carrying your CO2 breaks,
spills into a low-lying area, and suffocates anything living there?
Nevertheless, an interesting first step.
15 comments:
Interesting article, but I have a couple of questions about it.
First, I am not really convinced by the leaking pipeline killing plants and animals scenario. I know that there have been cases like this in volcanic regions, but I always thought that was due to a large abount being released over a short period. From a practical point of view, I don't see it as much danger to humans since if the gas or CO2 liquid was escaping in a sufficient volume to cause concern it would make a hell of a noise. If it was in a liquid form, there could be considerable damage from cold.
I would also think that CO2 would be fairly well mixed fairly quickly.
I think that some form of CO2 sequestration should be thrown into the mix as a part of the solution. I would be more inclined to back conservation though (personal opinion).
Thanks for the interesting article.
John Cross
John,
It probably isn't a likely scenario, but the idea is that a leak spills gas into a kind of hollow area and it builds up, very much like that African Lake that spilled C02 in the 1980s.
Wasn't there a Sesame Street episode on this matter?
The Letter E Salesman character, in between Golden An smuggling attempts, attempting to sell a bottle of air to Grover?
Has the AGW narrative sunken so low as to be suitably mocked by Sesame Street?
BCL: Good point, I forgot about Lake Nyos. I am not convinced that a sufficient volume could be released in a given time, but it is obviously a possibility.
My other comment about the article in question was the statement about the CO2 in water forming something highly toxic. I do not see how this could be a problem for people (fish wouldn't like it of course).
Interesting stuff.
Regards,
John
Wingnut chain of logic:
1. Present a hair-brained comparison:
"Wasn't there a Sesame Street episode on this matter?"
2. Fill the air with incoherent blather:
"The Letter E Salesman character, in between Golden An smuggling attempts, attempting to sell a bottle of air to Grover?"
3. Finish with what is the only real point of the intervention, which was to be insulting and ignorant:
"Has the AGW narrative sunken (sic) so low as to be suitably mocked by Sesame Street?"
Waste of time, waste of energy. And these are the people who are supposed to be focussed on economic productivity and efficiency?
William G...sheer stupidity is not globally competitive. Talk to Harper about how he might help you. He'll probably suggest you make a donation to the CPC.
"(sic)"
Whoawhoawhoa, insults are fine, but I will *not* be corrected by a Scotsman on matters of language.
Sunken as past participle of "to sink" has its origins in Middle English. While some might consider it obsolete, it is indeed listed as a verb at both dictionary.com and the American Heritage Dictionary:
sunk·en (sŭng'kən) Pronunciation Key
v. Obsolete
A past participle of sink.
Don't EVER attempt to correct an Englishman again. It's actually racist to not celebrate (thought you caught a split infinitive, eh? Most dictionaries have deprecated that rule, seeing as how Latin is dead) our linguistic diversity and heritage.
"My other comment about the article in question was the statement about the CO2 in water forming something highly toxic."
The issue with CO2 and water is likely more to do with acidification resulting from the formation of carbonic acid. If you're having difficulties picturing how that could be a problem for people think "Acid Rain".
Anonymous: True, in water CO2 will form carbonic acid. But carbonic acid is not strong. Acid rain is caused by sulphur emissions forming sulphuric acid.
Regards,
John
Whoawhoawhoa, insults are fine, but I will *not* be corrected by a Scotsman on matters of language.
Who's the Scotsman?
I think the closest thing we've got is BCL...Who's an Irish protestant, I believe.
I will correct your mangling of l'anglais de la Reine whenever I see it. And that includes archaisms.
"Who's the Scotsman?"
A better question is where are the francophones among the Liberal trolls.
It would be logical for a Liberal operative house troll to assume the identity of a francophone (sort of like how the neo-cons use WASP pseudonyms when spreading their nonsense on the web, but that's for another day) to accomplish two goals.
It would be logical for a Liberal operative house troll to assume the identity of a francophone blah blah blah...
I think I dealt with the issues surrounding your "logic" earlier in the discussion.
...and look up the word "troll."
Still, no good evidence linking CO2 and 'global temperature'. Maybe the earth is warming because of too much pixie dust, or Sasquatch hair. When science has figured it out, let me know. Until then, just shut up about C02.
Maybe the earth is warming because of too much pixie dust, or Sasquatch hair.
Still thinking about last night's cocaine-and-hooker binge, are you?
I'm sure you believe Man is also at fault for the movement of the magnetic pole, right? Perhaps we should buy up all the iron possible at any price, and give it to Third World countries to help restore the 'natural' balance. Otherwise the world will be destroyed!!!!
Cute response ti-guy, but you're again revealing a little too much about your own activities in these little 'digs' of yours.
Post a Comment