Does Direct Air Capture Plants That Remove CO2 Have Real Climate Social Utility!

JimofPennsylvan

Platinum Member
Jun 6, 2007
852
483
910
Good scientists really need to provide the American people with good scientific analysis on whether these corporations that plan to just take CO2 out of the air are really going to make a difference on the climate change issue for the better. I always thought from hearing the scientific commentary in the media that the science involved greenhouses gases, including CO2, building-up high-up in the atmosphere and at that location acting as an insulative barrier so that the light from the sun penetrates this barrier and heats up the planet but the barrier keeps that heat from being released into outer space, in other words, it keeps the heat in the earth's atmosphere and thereby heats the planet. Common sense would indicate the earth's atmosphere at ground level has CO2 because animal life, including human beings, exhale CO2 after taking in oxygen; common sense would seem to indicate that there would not be much climate protecting utility in taking CO2 out of the air at ground level because that is not the CO2 responsible for warming the planet. Now we have corporations either in business or planning to be in business taking ground level CO2 out of the air by essentially having ground level devices that essentially vacuum up ground level air and through technology just remove the CO2 from that vacuumed air and either turn it into other products or store it underground and then sell the removing CO2 credits to other corporations so they can lower or eliminate their carbon (CO2 emitting) footprint and end up with a public reputation of being very socially responsible. The question which should be raised in the American people's minds is this vacuuming of CO2 out of ground level air just a big-time money making scheme for the owners behind these businesses that stand to make a lot of money from these businesses and a con job by the big corporations buying these credits and then waving them around and claiming they are socially responsible businesses or is this societal effort making a meaningful difference in humanity's work to save the earth's climate! This topic is relevant in yesterday's Wall Street Journal they had an article about Occidental Petroleum Corporation plans to spend billions of dollars over upcoming years building these direct air capture plants that then remove CO2 from the captured and sell the created credits for big dollars. It sure would be nice if the scientific community and Congress would find out for the American people whether this activity really does make a meaningful difference in protecting the planet's climate because the buyers of these credits are going to be spending a fortune on these credits, money that could otherwise be going to higher wages, higher dividends and higher business investment for the American people! On the flip side for Occidental's Petroleum corporation the technology they have here is solid for removing CO2, using a solution of potassium hydroxide to remove CO2 out of body of air has utility, it would probably provide meaningful help for removing CO2 from industrial plants and their smoke stacks that just stream this greenhouse gas at high rates which one could see pushing in up into higher levels of the atmosphere! Occidental probably has a responsible and very profitable business in using this technology to remove CO2 from industrial plant emissions!
 
Good scientists really need to provide the American people with good scientific analysis on whether these corporations that plan to just take CO2 out of the air are really going to make a difference on the climate change issue for the better. I always thought from hearing the scientific commentary in the media that the science involved greenhouses gases, including CO2, building-up high-up in the atmosphere and at that location acting as an insulative barrier so that the light from the sun penetrates this barrier and heats up the planet but the barrier keeps that heat from being released into outer space, in other words, it keeps the heat in the earth's atmosphere and thereby heats the planet. Common sense would indicate the earth's atmosphere at ground level has CO2 because animal life, including human beings, exhale CO2 after taking in oxygen; common sense would seem to indicate that there would not be much climate protecting utility in taking CO2 out of the air at ground level because that is not the CO2 responsible for warming the planet. Now we have corporations either in business or planning to be in business taking ground level CO2 out of the air by essentially having ground level devices that essentially vacuum up ground level air and through technology just remove the CO2 from that vacuumed air and either turn it into other products or store it underground and then sell the removing CO2 credits to other corporations so they can lower or eliminate their carbon (CO2 emitting) footprint and end up with a public reputation of being very socially responsible. The question which should be raised in the American people's minds is this vacuuming of CO2 out of ground level air just a big-time money making scheme for the owners behind these businesses that stand to make a lot of money from these businesses and a con job by the big corporations buying these credits and then waving them around and claiming they are socially responsible businesses or is this societal effort making a meaningful difference in humanity's work to save the earth's climate! This topic is relevant in yesterday's Wall Street Journal they had an article about Occidental Petroleum Corporation plans to spend billions of dollars over upcoming years building these direct air capture plants that then remove CO2 from the captured and sell the created credits for big dollars. It sure would be nice if the scientific community and Congress would find out for the American people whether this activity really does make a meaningful difference in protecting the planet's climate because the buyers of these credits are going to be spending a fortune on these credits, money that could otherwise be going to higher wages, higher dividends and higher business investment for the American people! On the flip side for Occidental's Petroleum corporation the technology they have here is solid for removing CO2, using a solution of potassium hydroxide to remove CO2 out of body of air has utility, it would probably provide meaningful help for removing CO2 from industrial plants and their smoke stacks that just stream this greenhouse gas at high rates which one could see pushing in up into higher levels of the atmosphere! Occidental probably has a responsible and very profitable business in using this technology to remove CO2 from industrial plant emissions!
CO2 is a well mixed gas. It is at fairly consistent levels at all altitudes. What happens at high altitudes (the Stratosphere) is that the cold temperatures cause almost all the water vapor to precipitate out and the upper atmosphere is extremely dry. That leaves CO2 as essentially the only greenhouse gas up there. Its level in the atmosphere gains critical importance in controlling how fast IR escapes to space.

Additionally, warming causes the atmosphere to expand pushing the Stratosphere higher and higher and making a thicker water free layer at the top of the atmosphere.

None of these CO2 capture technologies are going to remove it faster than it will get redistributed from the rest of the atmosphere.
 
Is this "net outcome" scenario just a fancy way of saying that the wealthy can just plant trees and then continue life in their fossil fuel burning vehicles like jets and cars?
 
Is this "net outcome" scenario just a fancy way of saying that the wealthy can just plant trees and then continue life in their fossil fuel burning vehicles like jets and cars?
What is the "net outcome" scenario?
 
What do the poor and normal people do? Dig?
Conserve. Vote. Try to be a smart shopper. For the normal joe, it boils down to minimizing your consumption of electricity and gasoline and vote for politicians who share such values.
 
Co2 does absolutely NOTHING.

That is the DATA.

You are as wrong as wrong can be - about every single thing you've said here. E-VE-RY-SIN-GLE-THING.

main-qimg-6c88e20a95b9388752c995f911591be6-pjlq

images-6.fill.size_2000x1820.v1623362063.png


file-20170606-3681-1kf3xwv.jpg

temp-and-co2-for-last-1k-years%E2%80%93northern-hemisphere-map.jpg

Global-Temperature-Plot-1850-present-v2.jpg



Which kinda makes me think you might just be a troll.
 
All gas molecules absorb some part of the EM spectrum.

IR is at the WEAK END, which is why the puny amount of Co2 absorbing IR from the Sun does NOTHING.


O3 absorbs powerful UV for example...
 
You are as wrong as wrong can be - about every single thing you've said here. E-VE-RY-SIN-GLE-THING.

main-qimg-6c88e20a95b9388752c995f911591be6-pjlq

images-6.fill.size_2000x1820.v1623362063.png


file-20170606-3681-1kf3xwv.jpg

temp-and-co2-for-last-1k-years%E2%80%93northern-hemisphere-map.jpg

Global-Temperature-Plot-1850-present-v2.jpg



Which kinda makes me think you might just be a troll.
 
Ahhh... Patrick Moore. There is a conflicted soul.
 
He would probably call you brainwashed.
I truly doubt either one of us cares what the other thinks. My point was that since leaving Greenpeace he has been a consultant to the very businesses that Greenpeace was meant to counter. He is not a scientist and has done no research in the field. He has become a PR specialist. He has never been employed by the IPCC in any capacity so he certainly offers no more insight than any of you on any of these topics.
 
The stupid Moon Bats are too dumb to know it but CO2 is a good thing for the earth. Plants need it to grow.
 
The stupid Moon Bats are too dumb to know it but CO2 is a good thing for the earth. Plants need it to grow.
Stupid deniers have to make straw man arguments with which to argue since they have absolutely zero-zip-zilch to offer in any discussion of the actual science.

As you know perfectly well, NO one has EVER suggested taking CO2 below pre-industrial levels and we couldn't do it for centuries even if we wanted to. So far, we've only managed to very slightly reduce the fucking rate of acceleration.
 

Forum List

Back
Top