FReepmail me to get on or off
Click graphic for full GW rundown
Ping me if you find one I've missed.
~ more "carbon-gasm" ~
Posted on 02/18/2007 12:22:44 PM PST by rellimpank
On a few acres of declining natural-gas wells in the southern Rockies, officials with the Colorado Geological Survey are looking to unlock the future of clean energy.
The concept is tantalizingly simple: Bury carbon dioxide underground, where the greenhouse gas can't contribute to global warming.
Plus, consider the fringe benefit: When the COb is injected into aging oil and gas wells, it helps push the remaining fuel out of its hidden pockets for recovery.
But behind the premise is a complex series of tests that will take at least 12 years to carry out, collecting data and analyzing it.
America's power industry can hardly wait. With coal-fired power plants producing the majority of the nation's carbon emissions, electric companies are under increasing pressure to deal with their carbon pollution.
Many analysts believe the federal government will create a cap and tax on power-plant carbon emissions.
A new breed of power plant can convert coal to a cleaner-burning gas and, in the process, capture carbon dioxide
(Excerpt) Read more at denverpost.com ...
--another scientific genius in the press sneaks one past the proofreader--
They wouldn't be in that fix if they could build nuclear plants.
I think Japan is doing this.
It's all about carbon credit trading. China already own 42% of the credits at the UN.
--in defense of the writer, maybe he just can't do subscripts--
I meant, Japan is already injecting Carbon Dioxide underground.
Click graphic for full GW rundown
~ more "carbon-gasm" ~
I don't understand the fuss. The CO2 we are releasing into the air is perfectly natural, and still doesn't amount to what's been relased over time by natural oil seeps.
Take the term global warming out, and this whole thing is just legislation to further stuck us as spoon fed couch potatoes who should know no better and to be demoralized for the foreseable future.
There is nothing wrong with pumping CO2 in the air and heat as it actualy activates global circulation, just like jogging heats up a runner for a healthy and well circulated body. This in fact would aid, in a sort of sling shot and sweat like effect, cool the planet. Yes, it might cause some accute irregularities, but clean heating of the planet is good for it. Cut off the heat suddenly and it will indeed sling shoot and freeze to near death and sickness.
We have in power wizard and apprentice sorcerers who know jack crap about what they do and their evil hearts will reflect the evil result and they will all perish just as quickly as the rest of us would, because they do not have the dynamics in mind. The recent slow down in population growth presage a catastrophic depopulation and misery already... but hey, a stupid "private freeper" need not the attention according to these mainstream fools.
It's an image of the whole "security" "zero-tolerance" "soccer mum" right-left liberal alliance mantra of over domestication of the American citizen. It's fine for the nuts in Arabia, but not here, we're not backwards and we need not be treated into equalitarian lowest animal "human" denominator backwardness so that some pompous idiotic lawyer can call himself scientist to a bunch of happless people who now are dumned down, have no clue, and bow over their Devil "information welfare" TV lazily and all to complacent and complicit with the set up, tempted thereof by the evil false prophets running the corridors of accademia, politics and court rooms.
Global Warmin is not going to kill us, it's them who are killing us as we are speaking here. Period.
(By the way, windmills en-mass, if it affected global circulation, would be probably more toxic than carbon dioxide emissions in the long run)
This sounds like a jobs program to me.
"All responsible fossil energy companies recognize that carbon dioxide emissions need to be reduced or eliminated," said Dag Nummedal, director of the Colorado Energy Research Institute at the Colorado School of Mines. "Sequestering carbon is a key to solving the problem."
More "everybody knows" bullying assertion of consensus.
I will stand with the irresponsible fossil energy companies on this one. I don't believe we have any means of substantially increasing or decreasing atmospheric CO2. It is produced and absorbed by natural processes all over the surface of the Earth, and a chart that I have seen suggests that, historically, atmospheric CO2 levels follow temperature rather than vice versa.
If the idea of us outputting too much CO2 into the atmosphere is dubious, the idea that we can stuff it into the ground fast enough to make a difference is flat-out absurd.
Many analysts believe the federal government will create a cap and tax on power-plant carbon emissions.
We need analysts to predict the new regulations? Shouldn't our legislators be able to tell us? Or better yet, we could tell them?
You are right, and natural oil seep is probably far more poluting than burning it... the Exxon Valdez is an example of it, so we might as well burn it.
Indeed, "mainstreamization" processes in the world, historicaly, has killed a lot of people. Mainstream = "everybody knows" = following the stupid crowd and collective path to oblivion
Years ago there were (maybe still there) CO2 wells just west of Cortez, CO. The compressor station was just off a county road in McElmo Canyon. This CO2 was piped to Texas for secondary recovery efforts in oil wells.
This is not new technology by any means.
If someone has a practical reason to pump CO2 into the ground, go for it. But if they want to fund their project on the PC basis of saving the planet by "sequestering" CO2, no.
I wonder if the author realizes that the overwhelming majority of C02 (and sulfer dioxide) in our atmosphere comes from the ground?
Neither do I.
CO2 miscible flooding has been used in oil reservoirs for a number of years, principally in the Permian Basin in West Texas and in New Mexico.
CO2 reduces oil viscosity and maintains reservoir pressures and aids materially in oil recovery.
Let me guess, you never viewed the print copy...
I'd bet that the copy editor had it correct, with a subscript, and it's only the translation of the control characters to the website that came across wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.