Previous in Forum: Has The Cause of Crib Death (SIDS) Been Found?   Next in Forum: meaning of pipeline bending
Close
Close
Close
27 comments
Power-User

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Capital City, Cow Hampshire, USA
Posts: 477
Good Answers: 3

Carbon Sequestration

10/16/2008 8:20 PM

Recently listened to a bona-fide discussion on the merits of pumping CO2 underground for storage to help with climate change.

What are your thoughts on this procedure?

__________________
If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you've always had!
Register to Reply
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

Comments rated to be Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive ratings to make them "good answers".
2
Guru
Engineering Fields - Environmental Engineering - New Member APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Anywhere Emperor Palpatine assigns me
Posts: 2776
Good Answers: 101
#1

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/16/2008 10:50 PM

Personally, I think it would be better to use all that CO2 to feed algae, then use the algae for biodiesel production. But that's just me.

__________________
If only you knew the power of the Dark Side of the Force
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru
United Kingdom - Member - Indeterminate Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: In the bothy, 7 chains down the line from Dodman's Lane level crossing, in the nation formerly known as Great Britain. Kettle's on.
Posts: 30310
Good Answers: 817
#2
In reply to #1

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/17/2008 3:15 AM

Quite.

__________________
"Did you get my e-mail?" - "The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place" - George Bernard Shaw, 1856
Register to Reply
3
Anonymous Poster
#3

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/17/2008 5:37 AM

This has some merit, yet on a personal note I would hope the areas that the CO2 (liquid) is be held in, has been checked to ensure no large amounts of leakage are going to occur into unintended areas, like drinking water, local water tables.

A possible win win scenario might be to sequester the CO2 into waning oil fields, that are presently pumping water to help increase the production levels. CO2 would be captured while the oil is released; an additional plus is less water wastage. On the economic front the valving and holding mechanisms are already in place, and tested.

Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 3)
Power-User

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Capital City, Cow Hampshire, USA
Posts: 477
Good Answers: 3
#4
In reply to #3

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/17/2008 5:46 AM

Is it just me, or wouldn't we also be sequestering O2 at double the rate of the carbon?

__________________
If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you've always had!
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 588
Good Answers: 13
#5

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/17/2008 5:47 PM

there were papers presented last march on the process at gasprocessors.com.

The cost to recover the CO2 from a coal plant would be as follows. The equipment would cost about 25% of the cost of the power plant. The process would consume 30% of the plants power, meaning the plant would have to be 150% bigger than you need.

The amount of CO2 recovered from just 1 powerplant is about the same as all the CO2 we presently sequester under the name of CO2 flood or enhanced oil recovery. On proposal is to pump up the CO2 and allow it to sink to the bottom of the ocean. The compressors would consum an other 10% of the power plants production and a 3600 psi line is a little pricey to build to the middle of the ocean.

Now, what do you think?

Register to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Capital City, Cow Hampshire, USA
Posts: 477
Good Answers: 3
#6
In reply to #5

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/17/2008 5:56 PM

Still think it's smoke & mirrors.

If we want to sequester carbon, i'd use the bio method: bury old NYC phonebooks at the bottom of an old coalmine, start the cycle all over again.

Grow fresh pulpwood.

__________________
If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you've always had!
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 588
Good Answers: 13
#7
In reply to #6

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/17/2008 5:59 PM

or bury old plastic bottles

Register to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Capital City, Cow Hampshire, USA
Posts: 477
Good Answers: 3
#8
In reply to #7

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/17/2008 6:04 PM

Guess my thought was that biowaste has extracted carbon from air.

__________________
If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you've always had!
Register to Reply
Power-User
Hobbies - HAM Radio - VE6LDS Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Canada - Member - New Member Engineering Fields - Nuclear Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 284
Good Answers: 10
#9

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/17/2008 11:37 PM

I am concerned that the sequestered CO2 might escape and result in deaths like that lake in Africa that released a huge bubble of CO2 and killed many people and their animals. I would rate this as being as dangerous as some people rate underground storage of radioactive materials. In brief, I am agin it.

I could be convinced however if I had proof that orphaned oil and gas wells are adequately sealed and could be safely abandoned.

__________________
Semi-retired systems analyst, part time Ham radio operator, full time grandfather.
Register to Reply
2
Guru

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Aggieland, Texas
Posts: 659
Good Answers: 8
#11
In reply to #9

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/18/2008 5:31 AM

It is too risky to store the CO2 in the ground. This is another example of a project being considered without an earth to earth analysis. Every project should consider how much energy, pollution, etc. it takes to get the material for the project, the amount of energy, pollution, etc. from the project and the same when the project goes back to the earth. This was not considered in the CO2 project and it was not considered in the nuclear energy projects. The storage of the spent rods from the nuclear energy projects are time bombs waiting to go off. The ethanol projects are another example. Without taking into account all the energy required to make the corn and process it, the project isn't justifiable. The only way it's profitable is with tax dollars for subsidies. And that aint very profitable for the tax payers.

Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - bwire Hobbies - Car Customizing - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upper Mid-west USA
Posts: 7503
Good Answers: 96
#14
In reply to #11

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/18/2008 10:45 AM

GA we need be very selective what balance of trade issues we internally finance.

__________________
If death came with a warning there would be a whole lot less of it.
Register to Reply
Power-User
Hobbies - HAM Radio - VE6LDS Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Canada - Member - New Member Engineering Fields - Nuclear Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 284
Good Answers: 10
#16
In reply to #11

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/18/2008 5:48 PM

The answer to the fuel rod problem is to reprocess them and get the unused energy that is still in them. With the proper combination of fast breeder reactors and conventional thermal reactors combined with reprocessing, there would be very little nuclear waste to dispose of.

__________________
Semi-retired systems analyst, part time Ham radio operator, full time grandfather.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Aggieland, Texas
Posts: 659
Good Answers: 8
#20
In reply to #16

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/20/2008 4:41 AM

Yes, if the fuel rod problem could be solved, it would get the risk down to acceptable levels. I think other countries are already using this technology. It would be good to know just how much the half-life can be reduced before the rods are no longer powerful enough to make steam. I know that 50000 years is too long to store dangerous materials. An acceptable time may be 50 years. I don't know. But I do know that if the spent rods can be used again and then again, we would be able to use nuclear energy safely. Then, we would have a source of clean electricity for a long time. And, it would be cheaper than fossil fuels.

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - DIY Welding - New Member

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cairns, Qld, Australia
Posts: 957
Good Answers: 65
#25
In reply to #20

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/29/2008 1:56 AM

In another thread I mentioned 2 solutions for high level waste.

1. Place in an insulated container, circulate coolant and use this to generate power

2. In plasma form a large electrostatic field can reduce half life by as much as a billion fold. Heat liberated could also be used to generate power.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 588
Good Answers: 13
#22
In reply to #9

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/20/2008 9:39 AM

presently we are pushing billions of cubic feet of CO2 underground under the name of CO2 floods.

Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - bwire Hobbies - Car Customizing - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upper Mid-west USA
Posts: 7503
Good Answers: 96
#10

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/18/2008 2:47 AM

What new precautions would you ascribe before digging or spelunking or would we need C02 as well as Radon detectors in the basements and parking garages?

__________________
If death came with a warning there would be a whole lot less of it.
Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - DIY Welding - New Member

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cairns, Qld, Australia
Posts: 957
Good Answers: 65
#12

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/18/2008 8:25 AM

Why do we want to remove CO2?

Double CO2 in atmosphere gives about 75% increase in almost all crop yields. Why do we want to stop this?

Past geological ages are supposed to have had 10 to 20x our present atmospheric CO2 without any harm to anything. Why is it supposed to be a problem?

I agree this is somewhat off topic, but I think the question is relevant.

Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - bwire Hobbies - Car Customizing - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upper Mid-west USA
Posts: 7503
Good Answers: 96
#13
In reply to #12

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/18/2008 10:44 AM

Yes it is relevant but the entire issue is irrelevant it's a lure; worms catch fish but lures catch fishermen. All smoke no fire, taking attention from the real issues, the global warming argument didn't carry any weight within the scientific community until huge Government grants were attached.

__________________
If death came with a warning there would be a whole lot less of it.
Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Anonymous Poster
#15

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/18/2008 11:55 AM

Scratch, scratch...hmmm... let's see. you want to use Power to Pump CO2 into the ground....Where will you get the Power? How much CO2 will you produce to sequester this CO2 you have?

Register to Reply
Guru
Panama - Member - New Member Hobbies - CNC - New Member Engineering Fields - Marine Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Retired Engineers / Mentors - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Panama
Posts: 4274
Good Answers: 213
#17

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/18/2008 5:55 PM

Planting trees is a whole lot cheaper, and gets results a whole lot quicker than most schemes I have looked at. In addition, if you don't get the results you expect, plant more trees. If that doesn't work, you still have a pretty forest to enjoy...

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - DIY Welding - New Member

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cairns, Qld, Australia
Posts: 957
Good Answers: 65
#18
In reply to #17

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/19/2008 6:47 AM

In addition, most forests also improve rainfall in the area. This could increase our area of arable land.

I read about a wheat farmer who started planting trees. He found up to 20% of the property could be used for trees without reducing his crop.

He hadn't had the trees long enough to detect increased rainfall, but the windbreak formed reduced evaporation. He also reduced his insect problems because birds attracted to the trees cleaned up more insects than the crop they ate.

Register to Reply
Anonymous Poster
#19

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/20/2008 12:30 AM

Don't forget about the danger factor.

When gasses bubble up out of the sea they make whirl pools and water spouts which are know to sink ships.

Stored underground a sudden release would temporarily kill every living animal in the area of the release.

Other than the shear stupidity of the idea its perfectly sound....

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - Musician - New Member Hobbies - Car Customizing - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: FL Space Coast
Posts: 536
Good Answers: 14
#21
In reply to #19

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/20/2008 6:58 AM

"Other than the shear stupidity of the idea its perfectly sound...."

Ha ha, What a great statement. I love it!

Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 588
Good Answers: 13
#23
In reply to #19

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/20/2008 9:45 AM

There already is billions and billions of tons of CO2 and Methane laying on the bottom of the oceans. They are in a crystaline form called hydrates.

Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - bwire Hobbies - Car Customizing - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upper Mid-west USA
Posts: 7503
Good Answers: 96
#27
In reply to #19

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/29/2008 10:13 PM

KBYG

__________________
If death came with a warning there would be a whole lot less of it.
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 73
Good Answers: 10
#24

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/20/2008 5:57 PM

I wish I had the time to write about this one let alone the idea that anyone could actually believe that it will affect our climate. Alas, I have to put it all into one quick sentence. 'And thus we see that the flood of moronic ideas continues.'

Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Weaponology - bwire Hobbies - Car Customizing - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upper Mid-west USA
Posts: 7503
Good Answers: 96
#26

Re: Carbon Sequestration

10/29/2008 10:10 PM

A mass collection effort to collect, compress for storage then intermittent release to cool the polar region, maybe?

__________________
If death came with a warning there would be a whole lot less of it.
Register to Reply
Register to Reply 27 comments
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

Comments rated to be Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive ratings to make them "good answers".
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Anonymous Poster (3); bwire (5); cwarner7_11 (1); DVader1000 (1); IanR (1); PAPADOC (2); PhysicsProf (1); PWSlack (1); sceptic (3); sidevalveguru (3); The_curious_one (2); vicini (4)

Previous in Forum: Has The Cause of Crib Death (SIDS) Been Found?   Next in Forum: meaning of pipeline bending

Advertisement