Clean coal test traps 95 percent carbon: Norway firm (Won't be good enough for the eco-terrorist)

Reuters ^ | 11/16/2007 | Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent

[tobyhill]

OSLO (Reuters) - Tests of a new technology for capturing greenhouse gases from coal-fired power plants have achieved 95 percent cuts in a step towards new ways to fight climate change, a Norwegian company said on Friday.

"It's a breakthrough for us," Henrik Fleischer, chief executive of Sargas technology group, said of tests held since October of a prototype at the Vartan power plant, run by Finnish energy group Fortum (FUM1V.HE: Quote, Profile, Research) in Stockholm.

"A competitive coal-fired power plant with carbon dioxide capture could be built today with this technology," he told Reuters. "It could produce energy at competitive costs."

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I was always told that it propelled and chilled beer. But beverage expert hardly, I.

[Blue Highway]

Not sure how a system like that would work, but maybe in a contained environment like greenhouses might benefit.

[Unassuaged]

No, they are too busy building old style, inefficient plants all over Texas. There seems to be zero interest.

[norwaypinesavage]

"Not sure how a system like that would work, but maybe in a contained environment like greenhouses might benefit."

I agree, I'm not sure how it would work, either. There are millions of tons, annually, its pressurized, and it can't be released into the air. Plants in a greenhouse would use just a few pounds of it. The logistics just aren't there.

[reagan_fanatic]

The enviro-weenies won’t be satisfied until we’re living in mud huts and eating bugs.

[Blue Highway]

Yeah while they live in their Park Avenue Penthouse sipping Perrier telling the masses to keep eating roots and grubs, and enjoy their mud huts provided by Jimmy Carter and Habitat For Humanity, which was made possible through HUD.

[untrained skeptic]

Well, every time you drink a carbonated beverage, you release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Fermentation creates CO2.

Maybe what we need to do in order to expose they whole man-made global warming myth is to personalize the issue for millions of Americans and tell them that they are coming for their beer next. (girlie malt beverages as well)

Then when snobbish people say it doesn't effect them, remind them that wine is fermented too.

[Blue Highway]

When the time comes that humans cannot pass gas legally, we know we are near the end.

[kidd]

This assumes that CO2 is “dirty”

It is not.

It is not a pollutant.

There is nothing new about CO2 scrubbers (I designed one in college 25 years ago). It is an expensive piece of equipment, whose cost, if implemented, would be passed down to the consumer. The added cost would provide an insignificant contribution to not solving a non-problem.

[Cold Heart]

CO2 is half the equation in the production of urea fertilizer.

[Cold Heart]

CO2 is half the equation in the production of urea fertilizer.

[Cold Heart]

Double posting does not indicate an increase in percentage of CO2

[agere_contra]

So ... whats the problem with atmospheric CO2?

[Eric in the Ozarks]

When I worked at a refinery, one of the sales reps wanted to sell our CO2 to a Kosher pickle bottler. We couldn’t make the sale unless our CO2 unit was dubbed officially Kosher. The bottler was Jewish and he was able to arrange for a rabbi to come by and inspect the unit. We explained how the system worked and the rabbi was of good humor and approved our CO2.

[norwaypinesavage]

"CO2 is half the equation in the production of urea fertilizer."

Yes, but CO2 is a waste product in the production of ammonia and is used for the production of urea in the same production plants. CO2 is not imported to the production plant, particularly, in large quantities of pressurized CO2 gas.

[norwaypinesavage]

"So ... whats the problem with atmospheric CO2?"

Algore doesn't like it. Besides, he served in Vietnam, and won the Nobel Peace Prize.

[chrisser]

Not sure how a system like that would work, but maybe in a contained environment like greenhouses might benefit

Maybe dovetailing it onto the irrigation systems? How about just running inflatable "pipes" down the rows and releasing a steady stream of CO2 at ground level whenever the sun is shining (I'm under the assumption that CO2 is primarily used during photosynthesis...). I'm sure with some simple monitors, the air above the crops could be checked for excess C02 from ambient and the levels adjusted to only supply what the crop can utilize.

Personally, I don't really care if extra goes into the air - I don't subscribe to the quackery of anthropogenic global warming. I'm more interested in increasing crop yields with something that would otherwise be a waste product...

[Hunterite]

Sure, store 50 years of carbon dioxide under the ground and pray an earthquake doesn’t release it all at once.

The only solution the eco-terrorists, greens and democrats will be happy with is to kill 4 billion humans. But that is Politically Incorrect. Doublethink.

[Always Independent]

It gives me a headache.

[Hunterite]

“Maybe dovetailing it onto the irrigation systems? How about just running inflatable “pipes” down the rows and releasing a steady stream of CO2 at ground level whenever the sun is shining (I’m under the assumption that CO2 is primarily used during photosynthesis...). I’m sure with some simple monitors, the air above the crops could be checked for excess C02 from ambient and the levels adjusted to only supply what the crop can utilize.

Personally, I don’t really care if extra goes into the air - I don’t subscribe to the quackery of anthropogenic global warming. I’m more interested in increasing crop yields with something that would otherwise be a waste product...”

You know how fast air molecules mix.