Thanks for informative posts, Turbofish.
Why carbon dioxide is not a pollutant
Sort:
you are 100% right about the global warming, biggest crock of $#!% ever.
For Israeli firm, an answer to global warming blowing in the wind
For an Israeli start-up, one answer to global warming is blowing in the wind. The company called NewCO2Fuels, or NCF, has been developing its own version of a technology that allows heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions to be captured and recycled back into useable fuel.
http://phys.org/news/2015-12-israeli-firm-global.html
Dec 8, 2015
0
#65
Why NOT turn all technology into a green technology like Uruguy did ,see the news
Uruguay makes dramatic shift to nearly 95% electricity from clean energy
http://auto-chess.blogspot.com/2015/12/uruguay-makes-dramatic-shift-to-nearly.html
Dec 8, 2015
0
#66
lavin_arrt wrote:
Why NOT turn all technology into a green technology like Uruguy did ,see the news
Uruguay makes dramatic shift to nearly 95% electricity from clean energy
http://auto-chess.blogspot.com/2015/12/uruguay-makes-dramatic-shift-to-nearly.html
I think that is a good idea.
I consulted on a wind energy project a few years ago. Ideal location. The County killed it because environmentalists complained about dangers to the "least tern" - a local bird.
Green energy, however, is unable to meet the power demands of the US. An economy that runs on energy, can not afford to run short.
Dec 17, 2015
0
#67
america could install wave power around its extensive shoreline , solar panel its deserts , is chicago the only good place for wind power jamie ?
but instead it exports earth destruction with its fracking , now allowed in uk , we copy all americas bad bits , terrorises countries rich in oil ,
if america has to go to these lengths to run its economy then it needs to step back from mammonism
Dec 17, 2015
0
#68
ANOK1 wrote:
america could install wave power around its extensive shoreline , solar panel its deserts , is chicago the only good place for wind power jamie ?
but instead it exports earth destruction with its fracking , now allowed in uk , we copy all americas bad bits , terrorises countries rich in oil ,
if america has to go to these lengths to run its economy then it needs to step back from mammonism
Fracturing of hydrocarbon-productive reservoirs has been a standard practice for more than a century. It used to be the drillers would drop dynamite down the open hole, some times resulting in a "blow out." Today, hydraulic fracturing is a safe and proven production method.
Anywhere there is a fairly regular wind, wind power can be narnessed. I consulted on a wonderful wind power proposal for coastal California. It was scuttled by political influence from the envirnmental lobby. Pity.
Wind power at Hyannisport, Massachusetts, was blocked by the Kennedys.
Dec 17, 2015
0
#69
TurboFish wrote:
Even if we agree that we should try to lower CO2 levels (even assuming human-caused global warming), the automatic assumption by most people seems to be that the remedy requires slowing down worldwide economic activity by top-down regulations (taxes and caps).
But meanwhile, many scientists have been looking at atmospheric CO2 as a useful resource. Just as plants can extract CO2 from the air and use it to build their bodies through the process of photosynthesis, humans can remove CO2 from the air to produce useful chemical commodities and possibly fuels. If this idea proves to be economically viable, the combined efforts of nature and human activity could lead to a net reduction of atmospheric CO2 levels within decades. And instead of resulting from unpopular economy-slowing regulations, this reduction could come from spontaneous business-friendly economic growth.
Science and technology give us the power to harm or heal nature. For better or worse, humans are and always will be key players in the health of our biosphere. We need to remember to use our imaginations, not panic, and keep our options open. Trying to force a global economic slow-down would fail anyway -- too many developing countries refuse to go along with such a drastic and unproven plan.
Lowerng CO2 levels could kill the plant life on the planet, which would cause a total biological collapse.
My bad guys. I caused global warming. :-/
new cars don't even make enough co2 to commit suicide in a closed garage. running out of co2 and killing all the plants is a real possiblity!
Oil is used in the making of all kinds plastic products that we use everyday.
Well if we start running too LOW on CO2, we can just stop removing it from the atmosphere, and fire up some gas-guzzling SUVs. I'm willing to make that sacrifice.
yup you cant make plastic with a windy day
I bet Chuck Norris could.
Dec 17, 2015
0
#76
TurboFish wrote:
Well if we start running too LOW on CO2, we can just stop removing it from the atmosphere, and fire up some gas-guzzling SUVs. I'm willing to make that sacrifice.
The Earth is already near all-time lows in CO2 atmospheric concentrations. CO2 is "plant food."
Don't you all know by now that you can't argue facts here? There will always be a liberal to deny them, an unintelligent donkey to discredit them, a grown man acting like a child because you called him out, and a troll to argue either way...
...and how many humans lived well in the Mesozoic era?
Dec 17, 2015
0
#80
Nah. We simply can't breath it, since it is a toxic waste product from our body.
In which case, it is a pollutant; to us; the same way oxygen was a pollutant to most creates on young Earth. Bless the deviant little idiot organism that survived the infamous goat-slime for a gas which eventually gave rise to the very multi-cellular organisms billions of years later that depend their stupid survival on it. =)
Thoughts?
Here's a link to the Joint Center for Artificial Photosynthesis site:
http://solarfuelshub.org/research/index.html
Solar Fuels
The Sun produces enough energy in one hour to power all human activity on Earth for a full year, and yet storage of this energy in the form of convenient, inexpensive fuels has remained technically elusive despite steady scientific progress. The design of highly efficient, non‐biological, molecular‐level energy conversion “machines” that generate fuels directly from sunlight, water, and carbon dioxide is both a formidable challenge and an opportunity that, if realized, could have a revolutionary impact on our energy system. However, we still lack sufficient knowledge to design solar-fuel generation systems with the required efficiency, scalability, and sustainability to be economically viable.
JCAP seeks to discover new ways to produce energy-dense fuels, such as hydrogen and carbon-based fuels, using only sunlight, water, and carbon dioxide as inputs. Artificial photosynthesis, once achieved and scaled up, could be significantly more efficient than biofuel production processes and would not require arable land, agricultural feedstock, or substantial inputs of energy or water. Success could ultimately drive commercial development of solar-fuel systems designed from inception to be easily deployable almost anywhere
Research in JCAP spans efforts ranging from the fundamental discovery of new catalysts to the design and testing of prototype test-beds.
The research program involves four research thrusts:
Thrust 1: Electrocatalysis
Discovery and understanding of heterogeneous CO2 reduction reaction and oxygen evolution reaction electrocatalysis
Thrust 2: Photocatalysis and Light Capture
Discovery and understanding of CO2 reduction and oxygen evolution photocatalysis and development of light harvesting photonic architectures
Thrust 3: Materials Integration into Components
Development and understanding of integrated catalyst/light absorber assemblies
Thrust 4: Modeling, Test-Bed Prototyping, and Benchmarking
Modeling and simulation of device parameters and test-bed architectures