Scientists Looking at Ways to Trap Greenhouse Gases -WP

[Rose Siding]

TEMPE, Ariz. -- With its dented metal cylinders, rust-colored tanks and network of silver tubing, the Goldwater Materials Science Laboratory at Arizona State University does not look especially high-tech. But if an ongoing experiment there succeeds, this unassuming basement facility near Phoenix could offer a partial way out of the nation's greenhouse-gas problems.
...
But many business leaders and top policymakers, including President Bush, reject the idea of imposing mandatory limits on carbon dioxide emissions because, they contend, it could hurt the U.S. economy. As one alternative, some scientists, funded by government and private industry, are exploring whether they can extract carbon dioxide from the air in meaningful amounts and trap it underground, beneath the sea or on land.

But scientists are deeply divided on whether "carbon sequestration" can make a dent in the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Advocates say it could at least mitigate the impact of humans' insatiable hunger for cheap fossil fuels, which provide 85 percent of the globe's commercial energy. Critics say it is an unrealistic and shortsighted response to a problem that requires politicians to make hard economic choices.
...
The Bush administration is spending tens of millions of dollars on research projects such as the one at Arizona State. In its new budget, the White House is seeking $107.4 million for sequestration studies at the Energy Department, which is currently funding 65 projects at an annual cost of $80 million. The Agriculture Department is spending an additional $18 million a year on carbon research and sequestration projects and seeking $3 million more. The government also plans to spend $550 million in the coming decade on FutureGen, a coal-fired power plant that will capture all carbon dioxide emissions on site.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42365-2005Feb21.html

[satya]

1. Just think if they invested that much of OUR money in alternative fuel

development. Oh silly me, *'s cronies haven't figured out how to corner the market on renewable sources of energy. If they're not gonna make money on it, why bother?

[Sinistrous]

2. Why is bushder, inc. spending big bucks on a coal-fired generating plant

that captures all carbon dioxide emissions if they believe carbon dioxide emissions don't affect anything? Somewhat strange to my little linear mind.

[illflem]

3. Dream on

"What we're trying to do is take what nature does over 100,000 years and do it in less than an hour for 10 bucks a ton" of sequestered carbon, McKelvy said.