Sucking CO2 from the Sky

A great answer Roger. If more money was spent on addressing real problems such as hunger and inadequate supplies of pure water rather than cheap laptops or chasing after imagined crises (GW), the world would be a lot better off.

Thanks, but global warming isn't imagined, it's very real. The belief that it is in question is imagined.

This scientist thinks so Scientist, pseudo scientist, or con artist.

Any device or system that generates as much CO2 as it captures for sequestering is a fools device. Totally insane!

Makes the device look like its helping the environment. When it is depleting energy to make the CO2. The energy use made more CO2 in its creation. The oil that it helps extract will be use creating more CO2. In the process of the oil extraction how much of the CO2 will be vented into the atmosphere?

Sounds like a sales pitch for a machine to help the oil companies extract oil from depleted wells. Make them feel they are doing something to help the environment.

Plant a TREE.

Lots of small changes commensurate with the available (and reasonably foreseen) technologies, consistent with economic principles, and adopted by a majority of the world's energy consumers is what will address our energy concerns and hence production of greenhouse gases. Unnatural sequestration of carbon just doesn't seem to be a viable course of action. Trees do it much better and put the carbon into a useful form, i.e. cooking, heating, construction, books, furniture, etc.

Without making any judgment on whether or not a CO2-removing system is needed...

The best way to sequester CO2 from the atmosphere is probably to assist mother nature in doing it the natural way- by building coral reefs. By building artificial reefs out of material such as limestone rock we would be creating environment where corals can get a foothold and do what they do so well- turn CO2 into rock. Initial cost may be high, but once the artificial reef is in place the system needs no more financial investment and may continue sequestering for hundreds or thousands of years. And this does not even consider the various other benefits from additional coral reef environment.

Bill Morrow

Nature's own Global Warming -- Recently there have been articles and reviews on the melting Arctic ice and the warming temperatures. While we may blame humans for "global warming," Nature itself has provide a much greater source of greenhouse gases in the form of "Burning Ice" (Methane Hydrates) that in the geological past have outgassed in massive amounts periodically into the atmosphere. I will review the megatons of burning ice later on, but first there is a technical scientific issue to resolve.

The issue of "global warming" brings up the need for good mathematics in analyzing the various data sources to determine the true causes-and-effects ("inputs" and "outputs") and to filter out those causes that either do not affect the output, or in minor ways, or in combined effects that do not show up until certain conditions are correct. As I have spent time in R&D and also getting my series of degrees, I have found that very few scientists and researchers know how to use statistics properly to be able to filter and view data for the actual, true cause-and-effects. Too many times statistical regression methods are used that assume a direct relationship between the causes and effect, which may not be real. Although there are several books on the market, one of the best books I know of that can help researchers, analysts, and scientists is a book entitled, "Statistics for Experimenters," by Box, Hunter, and Hunter.

When it comes to global warming, there are more causes than most scientists have considered. For example, the increase in the number and intensity of solar eruptions has a much higher statistical correlation than the other causes/inputs. There are not many web pages that show these in good ways, but here are two articles for present the correlations rather easily.

http://www.qualitydigest.com/mar98/html/spctool.html
http://www.qualitydigest.com/april98/html/spctool.html

Although these graphs are from the late 1990s, the use of this type of statistical tool, SPC charting, has hardly ever been used by scientific researchers and investigators. Most of them have used other mathematical methods that assume a direct correlation between greenhouse gases and Global warming, as directed and determined by the process modeler. This traditional "assumption" may not be correct, and in some cases may potentially mislead scientists and modelers. These other tools can allow a scientist to purposely minimize the effects from natural causes and to maximize the effects of human sources.

Some researchers say that they know all the effects that the increased solar flux has on the atmosphere and have included this in their models, and stated that there are no real effects from the solar flux. But then there are other scientists with different theories on the effects of increased flux that present different scenarios for atmospheric reactions, such as the geomagnetic fields and changes, volcanics and their outgassings, etc. You do not hear much in the news about these other scientists and their results.

People should be very cautious about assuming that the global warming "effect" is due solely to "greenhouse" gases. Also, it should be noted that recent satellite data has shown that upper atmosphere is actually cooling:

http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/pa/News/121699text.html
http://ees5-www.lanl.gov/IGPP/Debate2.html
(some of these links may not be working due to computer changes since 9-11)

Some researchers say that their theory and modeling shows that this cooling should occur, while others show differing effects. We see that there is still not complete agreements on the causes and especially the effects of global warming. Then there are some researchers who have purposely manipulated their models, formulas, and analyses to purposely disregard all other inputs and only tie the temperatures to greenhouse gases.

There is the other issue of how some scientists and researchers can purposely change the structure of the formulas used in their models, the mathematical terms used in the formulas, the parameters and scaling factors in the formulas, and the values of any exponentials so as to obtain predetermined results that the scientists wanted to get anyway. This allows the scientist to minimize effects from natural causes and to maximize the effects of human sources. This is "tampering" with the formulas so as to get the predetermined results that someone might want to get, no matter what the real processes are.

In my experiences in the scientific / R&D cultures, I have seen this happen several times, even with Peer Reviews. Peer Reviews are "supposed" to catch incorrect things, inconsistencies, and errors. But this does not always occur. In some cases, the scientific peers involved in those Peer Reviews also wanted "certain" results to come out of the modeling and designs that they were reviewing. In other cases, the peers were not paying attention to critical items and issues.

Also the issue of temperature collection has not been properly resolved. Temperatures are taken in cities that have the heat island effect. I have seen several different approached to handling and correcting these heat effects, but these approaches vary and also give various results. Then there is the issue of thermometer calibration. I have observed where some thermometers for city temperatures were not calibrated properly at the required intervals, and some times not calibrated at all. How can we trust the temperature data if there are these variations in the instruments?

When it comes to Nature's greenhouse generators through the Burning Ice (Methane Hydrates), we soon realize that our gases are very small when compared to the megatons of methane hydrates that are held within our oceans in a manner similar to a bathtub ring. Also the Earth has had major accumulations and releases in its geological past over the eons, some of which scientists now believe may have lead to some great temperature increases in the Earth's past, long before humans were ever around.

Let me give you some web sites that describe the characteristics and issues with the Earth's Burning Ice and the natural abundance of methane greenhouse gases:

General information on chemistry and biology of Methane Hydrates:
--> http://www.at-sea.org/missions/extremes/preview.html

--> http://www-ocean.tamu.edu/Quarterdeck/QD5.3/sassen.html

--> http://ench1.ench.ucalgary.ca/~hydrates/

--> http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/oilgas/hydrates/

--> http://www.mbari.org/ghgases/

--> http://www.mbari.org/ghgases/geochem/gas_hydrates.htm

--> http://www.mbari.org/volcanism/Margin/Marg-Hydrates.htm

--> http://www.netl.doe.gov/scngo/NaturalGas/hydrates/index.html

U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) fact sheets:
--> http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/hydrates/

--> http://marine.usgs.gov/fact-sheets/gas-hydrates/title.html

--> http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs021-01/

--> http://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/project-pages/hydrates/

Germany's research:
--> http://www.mpi-bremen.de/deutsch/biogeo/mumm2.html

--> http://www.gashydrate.de/

In the geological records and how dramatically and even violently the climate has changed, long before modern man came around. There is very strong geological and scientific evidence that the massive Extinction in the Permian Era many millions of years ago in the Earth's geological past was caused both by massive volcanism and by Methane Hydrates.
http://www.terradaily.com/news/deepimpact-05r.html

Study breaks ice on ancient Arctic thaw:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Study_Breaks_Ice_On_Ancient_Arctic_Thaw_999.html
(previous periods of global warming)

And then there is the aspect of climate change from meteors:
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzo.html

Outgassing of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) from volcanoes:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs172-96/

Inaccuracies in measurements of climates:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Antarctic_Snow_Inaccurate_Temperature_Archive.html

Ancient Climate Studies Suggest Earth On Fast Track To Global Warming
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Ancient_Climate_Studies_Suggest_Earth_On_Fast_Track_To_Global_Warming.html

Green plants also cause Global Warming:
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/22944/
http://www.germany-info.org/relaunch/info/publications/week/2006/060113/e-list.html#Wi1
http://www.terradaily.com/news/The_Forgotten_Methane_Source.html
http://www.terradaily.com/news/Could_Forests_Worsen_Global_Warming.html
http://www.terradaily.com/news/Extinctions_Linked_To_Climate_Change.html

Farming Provides Wildlife Habitat And Reduces Global Warming
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Farming_Provides_Wildlife_Habitat_And_Reduces_Global_Warming.html

Prehistoric warming helped preserve fossils:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzzi.html

Ancient tropical warming and nature's greenhouse gases
http://www.terradaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzzj.html

Volcanic impacts on ocean levels:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/oceans-05y.html

Climate change and massive flooding:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/The_Role_Of_Massive_Floods_In_Climate_Change.html

Late Pleistocene Americans Faced Chaotic Climate Change Environments:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Late_Pleistocene_Americans_Faced_Chaotic_Climate_Change_Environments.html

Global Warming evidence from 55 million years ago:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzzzb.html

Tropical ice cores shows two abrupt Global Climate shifts:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Tropical_Ice_Cores_Shows_Two_Abrupt_Global_Climate_Shifts_999.html

How continental splits resulted in global cooling:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/antarctic-05q.html

Earth's burping from wobbling also affects climate:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzt.html

Geomagnetism as one factor in rain / weather:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Magnets_Help_Explain_Rain_Patterns.html

None of the environmentalists or businesses involved in reducing carbon emissions can go and blame massive climate changes in the past on power plants and vehicles!

It is not wise to make international policies on theories that are not agreed upon by the scientists who have been studying these causes and effects. Other scientists have published their works dealing with other causes, but have not been given the publicity such as the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) has received.

But if the Solar Sun is the major, primary cause and we are just a minor contributor, then our Governments are imposing on us a major compliance issue that will NOT solve the problem. Control of carbon emissions does NOT equal Control of the Solar Sun and its flux intensities on us. Several environmental groups have told us and openly admitted at other times that they want to use the idea of human sources in order to shut down industrial activities -- their words, not ours.

Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA.

Thank you Roger Pink !

I' second that motion. No Name No Game.

It could not have been said better.

Although this report is rather verbose, The Commoner, as the name implies would suggest that the views and hypotheses that the "Guest" puts forth can well be reduced to a much simpler medium. I am from Ohio. There were once glaciers that leveled the northwest corner of this state. That was long ago and with little or no help from "greenhouse" gases and human activities. The "hype" that is bombarding people all around the world from many differing directions is, at best, gratuitous and has no basis in fact. I, for one, am content that my daily routine has little or no effect on this vast atmosphere that surrounds us. I am not wasteful, just content.