The Lunatic Fringe Welcome Here

[Joe Blake]

As you may have read recently Richard Branson has offered a considerable cash prize (to wit $US25 million) for:

a commercially viable design which will result in the net removal of anthropogenic, atmospheric greenhouse gases each year for at least ten years without countervailing harmful effects. This removal must have long term effects and contribute materially to the stability of the Earth’s climate.

( http://www.gizmag.com.au/go/6819/ )

Now this group/board appears to be a bunch of radical, free-thinkers, (or even free-radical thinkers) so perhaps we need to have a forum to swap crazy ideas. Not necessarily with a view to winning $25 million (but I wouldn't say no, even splitting it over the entire membership of this group) as to how to address this problem.

Maybe pose questions. Such as: Is carbon dioxide the real "bad guy"?? Any contrary opinions?

Perhaps pose solutions: eg bubbling carbon dioxide (bad guy or not) through plain water creates (from memory) carbonic acid. Acid of course can be neutralised by an alkali to create a salt. Would it be possible to have a process to do same and lock carbon up in a salt formation?

Or:

Give that it is possible to use electricity to split water (H2O) into hydrogen and oxygen (electrolysis????) is it possible to do the same with CO2?? How much energy would be required? Could every house be fitted with a solar PV array dedicated to that task?

Anyway, let's keep it clean, and come out fighting.

;)

Joe

[John Dalhaus]

The only sensible solution is to stop pumping carbon dioxide into the air in the first place.

John

[Mark Parsons]

Thanks Joe, for considering all of us free-radical thinkers ....:eek: I prefer the term 'independently thoughtful'... :D

I read about Branson's prize. I'm not sure how he is going to pay out within 5 years for a solution that proves itself for 10 years... Gets him good press though.

A couple of WAI (Wild Ass Ideas) for sequestering atmospheric carbon dioxide:

1. Plants are genetically engineered to sequester atmospheric CO2. Our fossil fuels come from ancient atmospheric CO2. Buried plants ...... hmmmmm.... coal .... Let's just fill a bunch of open pit strip mines with fast growing biomass that is sun dried and kept dry to prevent composting. Future coal mines. Too simple??

2. The carbon black industry commands decent buck$ for their product since it is used in many products we use daily - all rubber products including tires, plastics, paints, filters, etc, etc. Unless incinerated, these products will sequester the carbon for centuries. Carbon black manufacturers' profit margins are slim these days due to a feedstock cost that has been rising dramatically - fossil fuels. Why not convert a couple of these processing plants to derive their feedstock from the atmosphere? Suck in great amounts of atmosphere, strip the oxygen from the CO2 molecule and sell the carbon black. OR - probably the most efficient and environmentally friendly process is to use algae to do the carbon stripping of the CO2 molecule. Incinerate the mature algae in an oxygen deprived environment same as current process methods. Voila - carbon black.

Want more? Got some better WAI?

Mark

[Ralph Smith]

That's one good use for a bush.

[Joe Blake]

The Great Barrier Reef down the eastern coast of Queensland (as well as other coral reefs (reeves??) around the world seem to be suffering from heat stress and dying.

Building a power generating station which uses thermoelectric devices (Peltier-Seebeck) to utilise the heat difference between upper and lower levels of water. Generate power and create a stream of cooler water to encourage regrowth of the algae which live in the coral.

Joe

[Mark Parsons]

Excerpt from Wikipedia -
"Human activity continues to represent the single greatest threat to coral reefs living in Earth's oceans. In particular, pollution and over-fishing are the most serious threats to these ecosystems. Physical destruction of reefs due to boat and shipping traffic is also a problem. The live food fish trade has been implicated as a driver of decline due to the use of cyanide and other chemicals in the capture of small fishes. Finally, above normal water temperatures, due to climate phenomena such as El Niño and global warming, can cause coral bleaching. According to The Nature Conservancy, if destruction increases at the current rate, 70% of the world’s coral reefs will have disappeared within 50 years."

Building a power plant next to them will likely cause further stress than good. I can imagine a multitude of environmental issues around even a eco-friendly power plant like ocean water temperature differential - such as coolant leaks, human debris and trash, varying salinity on effluent, etc.

The above description sounds like over fishing and pollution are bigger culprits than the global warming issue at this time.

Joe, send some of your warm weather up to Canada! Winter here started unusually mild but has since settled in with a vengence.:eek:

[Joe Blake]

Mark,

I'll send you all the warm weather you can handle if you'll send us some rain - even disguised as snow.

;)

My experience with Peltier-Seebeck devices is limited to the solid-state cooler/ warmer which have no coolants etc to worry about (eg car fridges etc), and I was thinking that they (ie power stations) would NOT (in fact COULD and, as you say SHOULD not) be built on the reef but rather "up-stream" (or I suppose to be more pedantic "up-current") from the reef. I have to confess I was actually slightly impressed with the performance of (one of two of) my Peltier-Seebeck "fridges". It actually managed to form ice, and drop the temperature in a 4(?) litre cooler filled with water (in a "wine cask inner") to about 2 degrees C within 24 hours, if memory serves me aright. (Although I have to say that I find the Engel "swing motor" much more energy efficient for cooling.

http://www.i-m-d.com/engel/Tech.htm )


Whilst I'm very wary of using Wikipedia as a reference (as a "free" reference one can certainly claim to get one's money's worth) I agree with you (and Wiki) entirely about "human activity" being a big factor, and as a "human" (for good or for ill) I'd like some of "my" activity to undo at least a minute fraction of the damage caused (pauses to don hair shirt). ;)

I suppose with a combination of (a) aquatic heat difference (b) solar energy (c) wave motion and (d) water current one could garner quite a bit of "free" energy, use the energy to cool the water (perhaps by evaporating sea water) and then condensing to give fresh water which could be piped ashore for consumption.

More calories for the brain.

Joe

[Stellar Gellar]

okay i just have to say that what amused me the most about this post, aside from the astonishing cash prize, was the "WAI" :laugh: