I will believe the Saudis don't see any upcoming problems with Ghawar when they cancel one of their projects due to low oil prices. If they continue to be full steam ahead with increasing their capacity then I think they are aware that Ghawar may not be as robust in 5 years time as they would like us to believe.
Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 10:42 pm Post subject: Re: CO2 Scrubber
To borrow from an earlier thread:
dohboi wrote:
When I first read about CO2 sequestration in a 2000 (or so) Scientific American issue on energy, I thought, "I hope nobody is taking these guys seriously. This is really crazy nuts stuff. We are madly UN-sequestering carbon (pumping oil, diging coal...) that has very safely been sequestered by the planet over hundreds of millions of years, and now we are going to put a tiny bandaid on that gaping wound by sequestering back some tiny fraction of what we have unsequestered, and at huge expense??? Only a society completely over the edge would even consider such an approach."
quote]
Membranes are good, but there are well moneyed, very bright researchers that have better technology that is being developed.
Humans are completely missing the point here. We cant burn a cubic mile of oil, (100 billion?) tons of coal, and (100 trillion? SCF) of natural gas every year and expect earth to maintain an agreeable climate.
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 12:12 pm Post subject: Re: CO2 Scrubber
aflatoxin wrote:
To borrow from an earlier thread:
dohboi wrote:
When I first read about CO2 sequestration in a 2000 (or so) Scientific American issue on energy, I thought, "I hope nobody is taking these guys seriously. This is really crazy nuts stuff. We are madly UN-sequestering carbon (pumping oil, diging coal...) that has very safely been sequestered by the planet over hundreds of millions of years, and now we are going to put a tiny bandaid on that gaping wound by sequestering back some tiny fraction of what we have unsequestered, and at huge expense??? Only a society completely over the edge would even consider such an approach."
quote]
Membranes are good, but there are well moneyed, very bright researchers that have better technology that is being developed.
Humans are completely missing the point here. We cant burn a cubic mile of oil, (100 billion?) tons of coal, and (100 trillion? SCF) of natural gas every year and expect earth to maintain an agreeable climate.
Why not? You make big assumption without facts to back it up. Typical doomer.
Joined: Apr 05, 2005 Posts: 1643 Location: Springsteen Country (NJ)
Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:56 am Post subject: Re: CO2 Scrubber
Serial_Worrier wrote:
Why not? You make big assumption without facts to back it up. Typical doomer.
Oh boy. If you're still alive 20 years from now, be careful not the utter the words "The doomers were optimists".
Why not indeed... _________________ Joe P. United Political Debate
"Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money." - Cree Indian Proverb
Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:24 pm Post subject: Re: CO2 Scrubber
Serial_Worrier wrote:
aflatoxin wrote:
To borrow from an earlier thread:
dohboi wrote:
When I first read about CO2 sequestration in a 2000 (or so) Scientific American issue on energy, I thought, "I hope nobody is taking these guys seriously. This is really crazy nuts stuff. We are madly UN-sequestering carbon (pumping oil, diging coal...) that has very safely been sequestered by the planet over hundreds of millions of years, and now we are going to put a tiny bandaid on that gaping wound by sequestering back some tiny fraction of what we have unsequestered, and at huge expense??? Only a society completely over the edge would even consider such an approach."
quote]
Membranes are good, but there are well moneyed, very bright researchers that have better technology that is being developed.
Humans are completely missing the point here. We cant burn a cubic mile of oil, (100 billion?) tons of coal, and (100 trillion? SCF) of natural gas every year and expect earth to maintain an agreeable climate.
Why not? You make big assumption without facts to back it up. Typical doomer.
No worries here. If global warming is the result of GHG emissions, and GHG emissions/global warming is the result of human activity, the situation will be self correcting at some point because of PO. Of course, humanity/civilization might not live through this, but that won't be a concern until it actually starts happening in a couple of years.
In the meantime, I'll listen to the what the climate scientists are telling me about anthropogenic global warming, and make a good living off the waste streams created by humans burning every goddamn thing in sight.
The CO2 scrubbers and strippers that are on the drawing boards and pilot plants right now are interesting, and fun to work on. It's good science, and the engineers and chemists involved care about what they are doing, and why they are doing it. It's even possible that the *GASP* energy companies are behind these projects in spirit. The cloak of secrecy surrounding some of these projects indicate that somewhere along the way, there is going to be a lot of money made by doing this.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
