|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 08:52 AM Original message |
What's the latest thinking on carbon sequestration? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
papau (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 09:09 AM Response to Original message |
1. Saw a dump on the idea saying it caused underground chemical changes that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-28-07 10:55 AM Response to Reply #1 |
15. I agree burning coal isn't an attractive option |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
XemaSab (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 11:00 AM Response to Original message |
2. There are a lot of the proper formations out there |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
phantom power (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 01:15 PM Response to Reply #2 |
5. what are the regulatory hurdles for a solar thermal plant? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
XemaSab (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 11:49 PM Response to Reply #5 |
14. Basically the same as any other power plant |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
phantom power (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-28-07 12:10 PM Response to Reply #14 |
17. so, in fact, siting *any* power plant is a regulatory hell-hole... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
XemaSab (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-28-07 09:19 PM Response to Reply #17 |
19. Pretty much, yeah |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kolesar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-28-07 01:49 PM Response to Reply #2 |
18. The power plant has to be near condenser-water and be near the sequestration-well |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
XemaSab (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-28-07 09:20 PM Response to Reply #18 |
20. You could also use it for industry, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NNadir (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-28-07 10:50 PM Response to Reply #20 |
22. The carbon dioxide market is nowhere near 27 billion tons. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kolesar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-01-07 06:48 AM Response to Reply #20 |
23. A greenhouse, maybe |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
XemaSab (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-01-07 10:37 PM Response to Reply #23 |
25. I had the crazy idea |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kolesar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Mar-02-07 06:58 AM Response to Reply #25 |
26. There is a poster on DU who has posted about ponds of algae->biodiesel in the AZ sun |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 12:56 PM Response to Original message |
3. here is a link to the DOE, if that would help |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kestrel91316 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 01:04 PM Response to Original message |
4. Pumping it underground or under the sea is not valid sequestration |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eppur_se_muova (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 03:44 PM Response to Reply #4 |
7. Converting CO2 back to C (charcoal) would consume a great deal of energy. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 04:10 PM Response to Reply #7 |
8. I don't understand where the coal comes from in your argument. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eppur_se_muova (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 05:28 PM Response to Reply #8 |
9. The OP was referring to CO2 from conventional power plants ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kestrel91316 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 06:03 PM Response to Reply #7 |
10. I don't think it has much value on a large scale as CO2 sequestration, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eppur_se_muova (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 09:25 PM Response to Reply #10 |
12. Point taken. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kestrel91316 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-28-07 11:58 AM Response to Reply #12 |
16. I also don't think it's a process of converting CO2 back to charcoal directly. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 01:17 PM Response to Original message |
6. I remain to be convinced |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nihil (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 06:41 PM Response to Reply #6 |
11. Far too radical to be supported by any significant people ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
XemaSab (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-28-07 09:22 PM Response to Reply #6 |
21. Usually capped oil formations |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Porcupine (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-27-07 11:19 PM Response to Original message |
13. It's a PR scam along with "Clean Coal." Greenwashing the indefensible. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
XemaSab (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-15-07 02:58 AM Response to Reply #13 |
31. "Clean Coal," according to my boss, is a coal plant |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
leftupnorth (657 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-01-07 10:22 AM Response to Original message |
24. I thought developing a pipeline system for CO2 to distribute it to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RestoreGore (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Mar-02-07 09:42 AM Response to Original message |
27. I read it hurts groundwater supplies, so I'm not too keen on it n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
XemaSab (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Mar-15-07 03:00 AM Response to Reply #27 |
32. It's pumped into saline aquifers |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dogmudgeon (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Mar-02-07 09:51 AM Response to Original message |
28. Uh, plant trees? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
efhmc (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-14-07 10:40 AM Response to Reply #28 |
29. I laughed so hard when I read this. I am doing a presentation today on |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Mar-14-07 12:48 PM Response to Original message |
30. As has already been said, Terra Preta |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat May 04th 2024, 06:00 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC