Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Still Waters

Global warming “can be reversed"

76 posts in this topic

Hi-tech new bio-energy plants could “reverse” global warming by pumping carbon dioxide into old gas wells - lowering temperatures by 0.6°C per century, according to a study.

There are already 16 projects around the world working on the technology - aiming to generate power for local homes by burning vegetation such as wood or straw and then burying the carbon dioxide it produces deep underground.

“It’s like drilling for natural gas, but in reverse,” says Niclas Mattson of Chalmers University, Sweden, co-author of the study.

http://uk.news.yahoo...-124259208.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok for now but will this "buried" CO2 pose a big problem for our future generations ?...and could it eventually leak into the Oceans causing all kinds of ecological problems.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like if we put in it the ground it will just cause other problems. If not in the short run then in the long run. :cry:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are already doing that I thought through carbon capture. We were going to that here in Alberta but its to expensive to be profitable with out government help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
burning vegetation such as wood or straw and then burying the carbon dioxide

Erm...CO2 released by burning veg. is not the problem - this CO2 isnt the Co2 throwing the balance out of wack. It's CO2 produced by burning fossil fuels that is the problem. Minor details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a typical techno-fix solution, ignore the primary cause which is our unsustainable lifestyle. It cannot solve the problems.

Carbon capture has proven to uneconomical to invest in. Its been abandoned in all the trials it has been tested in - just because it could be done doesn't mean anyone will stump up twice the cost in their energy to pay for it. Its a bit of a distraction to convince the public/government that somethings been done - when the fact is - nothings been done.

Br Cornelius

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are entirely too quick to jump to negative conclusions when it suits your perspective The technologies are just beginning to be explored, and if it turns out the natural gas is as abundant as it begins to appear it is, the price is going to be low enough to make us need them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CO2 sequestration is only one tool in the kit, and unfortunately it is very expensive.

A vast, and virtually untapped energy source, are the great Oceanic Currents that could be utilised to drive turbines to generate electricity. This field is so under - resourced for development because national Governments will not put up the money to prove its potential.

Other tools would be the outlawing of the Slash and Burn tactics of land grabbers in the Amazon Basin to create very poor farming land. The "Lungs of Earth" are being depleted in this ludicrous destruction, at an alarming rate and seriously affects the natural sequestration of CO2.

A huge, global programme of restoring the Forests' biosphere would yield quick results, and be very cheap to achieve.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CO2 sequestration is only one tool in the kit, and unfortunately it is very expensive.

A vast, and virtually untapped energy source, are the great Oceanic Currents that could be utilised to drive turbines to generate electricity. This field is so under - resourced for development because national Governments will not put up the money to prove its potential.

Other tools would be the outlawing of the Slash and Burn tactics of land grabbers in the Amazon Basin to create very poor farming land. The "Lungs of Earth" are being depleted in this ludicrous destruction, at an alarming rate and seriously affects the natural sequestration of CO2.

A huge, global programme of restoring the Forests' biosphere would yield quick results, and be very cheap to achieve.

If it were only Brazil... the deforestation is much nearer to home than you think.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

easiest (and cheapest!) way to reverse global warming?

if we all had shaved heads!

imagine just how much sunlight would be reflected back into space off 7Bn shiny chrome-domes....?

(and we could all wear bright green fright-wigs at nighttime....)

:-)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

You are entirely too quick to jump to negative conclusions when it suits your perspective The technologies are just beginning to be explored, and if it turns out the natural gas is as abundant as it begins to appear it is, the price is going to be low enough to make us need them

I read the report from the organization which umbrellas the Carbon capture industry - what I said was largely the conclusion they came to. There is no simple way to avoid the energy costs in capturing, compressing and pumping the billions of tonnes of CO2 back into the ground. This also means you waste a significant portion of your energy in attempting to capture the carbon - so total energy efficiency plunges. It increases the cost of your end product by 50-100%. There is no new and miraculous technology which is going to change these basic physical constraints.

All of the research projects were having massive problems in securing government funding to continue their work - it doesn't take Einstein to realize they had got high level analysis which told them it was wasted money.

As Keithco has pointed out there are vast natural energy resources which go largely unfunded because of the momentum of the fossil fuel industry and sticking plaster solutions such as carbon capture and fracking.

Never assume I haven't done the research when it comes to energy matters, you should read beyond the headlines to realize that most of these clean fossil fuel technologies are nothing but misrepresentation and hype.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a little puzzled by the tone of your assertions, especially those of research, and a lack of citations (that I expected under the circumstances). The cost is of course immense and the hype is no doubt nauseating. The thing I see developing however is quite enough fossil fuel to last a generation or so, keeping fossil fuel down low enough to crowd out other sources except in special situations.

The implication, if one wishes to be bold, is that this means CO2 will increase and we will not be luckily bailed out by an exhaustion of supply. (Some other form of luck could of course come along).

What will happen then is not hard to foresee. In spite of the somewhat silly political power you ascribe to the energy energy, warming temperatures will still happen and will become less and less deniable (unless of course it all is a fraud and both of us have been seriously mislead by the scientific community). In that case it will probably be too late to do anything except capture the CO2 and do something with it, combined with a global recession. This dire prediction will cause recapture to happen regardless of cost I don't foresee doomsday, but I sure do see some tough times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frank - the fossil fuel industry still receives subsides. A mature industry which is the most profitable in the world still receives subsides. If that is not pork barrel politics at work I don't know what is. As Doug has pointed out - once the initial up front investment is accounted for alternatives are cheaper than fossil fuels - so why are we still subsidizing fossil fuels rather than building a cheaper and more secure future through investment in alternatives.

the fossil fuel industry is investing heavily in alternatives - but they are not roling out the results of their investment until their main bread winner is exhausted. Simple economics - but we have to rely on the fact that governments take longer term strategic decisions such that we won't have to face the consequences of squeezing every last drop of oil and gas out of the ground. If you think that the oil/gas industry isn't one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the world - then I think you are crazy.

This sort of initiative is just pie in the sky and a destraction from the real work at hand - which is divesting our world of its dependence on fossil fuels. A sticking plaster - a fig leaf.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought global warming HAS been reversed? Or why are the various climate groups scramble to explain that there has been no global warming for the last 10 years?

If the topic is "climate change", that is ludicrious. Climate has been changing since the planet has been in existance. If there is anything constant about the global climate, it is the fact that is changing. Always.

This whole "global warming" issue has turned into a gigantic scam, first to extract research grants and now to create new taxations and give even more power to activist governments.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought global warming HAS been reversed? Or why are the various climate groups scramble to explain that there has been no global warming for the last 10 years?

If the topic is "climate change", that is ludicrious. Climate has been changing since the planet has been in existance. If there is anything constant about the global climate, it is the fact that is changing. Always.

This whole "global warming" issue has turned into a gigantic scam, first to extract research grants and now to create new taxations and give even more power to activist governments.

It has? Could you link to a credible source claiming that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

My certain knowledge shows that every time I follow the news another extreme weather event hits the headlines. Record cold in Northern Europe followed by record breaking heatwaves (which we are currently experiencing). Flooding in China and India. Anywhere you care to look dramatic weather events are acceleratingly in frequency.

The slow down in recent warming is due to the ENSO sending more heat to the ocean depths, the energy imbalance at the top of the atmosphere is still there and the total energy system continues to accumulate more energy. Average global surface temperatures have continued to rise when the data has appropriate statistical analysis applied. I really don't know where the conclusion that the climate scientists have thrown their hands up in shame and attempted to deny they got it wrong - where I am looking - every report continues to assert that global warming continues apace.

Zaphod you must be reading a different reference source - care to tell us where you got the notion that Global warming was all over :no:

Maybe its just a grand conspiracy hey ;)

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we need to really start thinking about why we are surrounding the planet with unnatural microwaves. Think about it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My certain knowledge shows that every time I follow the news another extreme weather event hits the headlines.

LOL, talk about self re-enforcing confirmation bias. Nowadays, every weather event is "extreme", and the media make it fit into their politically correct narrative.

How naive can you be.

Fact is, history is full of extreme weather events. It is only a couple of centuries ago that England was wine-producing area. And only a couple of thousand years ago that Europe was covered by an ice sheet. And none of this was caused by humans with SUVs.

Among all the politically correct fairy tales, this is one of the most ridiculous.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The earth is coming out of a glacial period. It has been much hotter in the past and for most of the time. Does arrogant mankind think that they can beat the powerful forces of nature? So far we can destroy 1,000,000 acres with one match but we can't create a single blade of grass. The Rocky Horror show summarised mankind perfectly, "And crawling on the planet's face, some insects called the human race, lost in time, lost in space, and in meaning.". Basically the earth is already well on the way to overpopulation. Overpopulation by people living below the breadline who resort to anything and everything to survive. I work in the middle of Africa and every day of my life I am assaulted by ignorant, lazy and selfish people. Burning fields and burning their trash, because they are too poor or too lazy to clear them in a sustainable way. On the other side of the world, big industry whose only goal is profit pumps out zillions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. Hundreds of millions of cars on theroads for whatever reason. I walk to work at least twice a week, what percentage of folk take alternative means of transport? Hats off to those who do. The earth has to accommodate more and more of people every second, until we reach the point where it will take only one more generation to reach a critical mass.

PS note that there are two issues, the part of global warming which we can't change, and the part which we can change.

Edited by 27vet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought global warming HAS been reversed? Or why are the various climate groups scramble to explain that there has been no global warming for the last 10 years?

If the topic is "climate change", that is ludicrious. Climate has been changing since the planet has been in existance. If there is anything constant about the global climate, it is the fact that is changing. Always.

This whole "global warming" issue has turned into a gigantic scam, first to extract research grants and now to create new taxations and give even more power to activist governments.

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

That's about all the effor this post deserves.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

That's about all the effor this post deserves.

Please say why he is wrong. (I'm not saying he is right, but your assertion warrants an explanation.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The earth is coming out of a glacial period. It has been much hotter in the past and for most of the time. Does arrogant mankind think that they can beat the powerful forces of nature? So far we can destroy 1,000,000 acres with one match but we can't create a single blade of grass. The Rocky Horror show summarised mankind perfectly, "And crawling on the planet's face, some insects called the human race, lost in time, lost in space, and in meaning.". Basically the earth is already well on the way to overpopulation. Overpopulation by people living below the breadline who resort to anything and everything to survive. I work in the middle of Africa and every day of my life I am assaulted by ignorant, lazy and selfish people. Burning fields and burning their trash, because they are too poor or too lazy to clear them in a sustainable way. On the other side of the world, big industry whose only goal is profit pumps out zillions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. Hundreds of millions of cars on theroads for whatever reason. I walk to work at least twice a week, what percentage of folk take alternative means of transport? Hats off to those who do. The earth has to accommodate more and more of people every second, until we reach the point where it will take only one more generation to reach a critical mass.

PS note that there are two issues, the part of global warming which we can't change, and the part which we can change.

Overpopulation? Maybe maybe not. I just read that if we were to take the population density of newyork city and applied it to Texas we could fit every living human inside the state of Texas. Just saying that to express we have a long way to go for over population.

Edited by Aus Der Box Skeptisch
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok for now but will this "buried" CO2 pose a big problem for our future generations ?...and could it eventually leak into the Oceans causing all kinds of ecological problems.

Injection wells are prone to earthquakes. The sites will have to be carefully chosen to avoid both known and unknown faults. Fortunatel, Oklahoma and Texas with their "pancake geology" have some useful sites (and a few that are earthquake prone).

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Does arrogant mankind think that they can beat the powerful forces of nature?

Absolutely. We can stop climatic cooling (and ice ages) cold with the output of one CFC plant. It is ourselves we cannot control, hence, global warming/climate change.

I work in the middle of Africa and every day of my life I am assaulted by ignorant, lazy and selfish people. Burning fields and burning their trash, because they are too poor or too lazy to clear them in a sustainable way. On the other side of the world, big industry whose only goal is profit pumps out zillions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. Hundreds of millions of cars on theroads for whatever reason.

Any proposal that aims to control global warming, but doesn't take the needs of people, especially the poor, into account will fail. A starving man will cut the last redwood or fry the last spotted owl to feed his family for one more day. The solution has to be a global solution.

I walk to work at least twice a week, what percentage of folk take alternative means of transport? Hats off to those who do.

I live only 3/4 mile from my office, so I walk any time the weather looks good. But most of America is not designed for walking. There are no sidewalks on my street - pedestrians share the road with cars, trucks and bicycles. There are no neighborhood stores within easy reach (< 1 mile), so every time I need something, I get in the car. Better designs and proper zoning could make a difference, if we could get our Republican city council off dead center - but in fairness to them, after nearly fifty years of "deferred maintenance" so as not to raise taxes, there are more urgent needs to consider - like our broken water mains.

The earth has to accommodate more and more of people every second, until we reach the point where it will take only one more generation to reach a critical mass.

Population growth is already slowing. The US is currently below ZPG; though, this is probably just a temporary condition caused by the poor economy. At the current rate we should reach ZPG late in this century at just under 10 billion. The problem for resource managers is how to feed, clothe and house that many people without destroying our own life support system. We have to hang on for another century.

PS note that there are two issues, the part of global warming which we can't change, and the part which we can change.

Absolutely (again). Fortunately, natural cycles are self-correcting if we don't destabilize them. It's OUR contribution that's the problem.

Doug

Edited by Doug1o29
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Overpopulation? Maybe maybe not. I just read that if we were to take the population density of newyork city and applied it to Texas we could fit every living human inside the state of Texas. Just saying that to express we have a long way to go for over population.

So the people of New York are self sufficient in New York. That is the assumption you have to make to follow your logic. The footprint of a New Yorker is global and covers 10's of acres of land.

Population density isn't a very useful figure unless applied to self sufficient rural communities.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.