Slashdot Mirror
DOE Pumps $126.6 Million Into Carbon Sequestration
RickRussellTX writes "The DOE awarded $126.6 million in grants today to projects that will pump 1 million tons of CO2 into underground caverns at sites in California and Ohio. Environmental groups call carbon sequestration "a scam", claiming that it is too expensive and uncertain to be competitive with non-coal alternatives like wind and solar. I just hope nobody drops a Mentos down the wrong pipe."
Carbon sequestration is like burying a ticking bomb in your backyard. A much better solution is carbon mineral sequestration - turning the carbon into rocks of some kind. That way, unlike underground sequestration (which has the potential to leak straight back into the atmosphere), the carbon stays where it is put.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
I like how 'environmental groups' is a link to a single source: Greenpeace.
As we all know, they're the kind of people that we can have a good intelligent discussion with, right? Of course, anyone that doesn't fall in line with their philosophy is some sort of heretic, even if they happen to be one of their own founders that disagrees with a long-standing platform of the organization.
I'd have a lot more respect for them if they also condemned Al Gore and his pimping of useless carbon credits that happen to fatten his own pockets...
"We'll need 2000 crickets, 4 cans of Easy Cheese, and the fluid from 18 glowsticks for this plan to work...." - ph0n1c
... my main concern is "what if it escapes?". Considering that CO2 is heavier than Oxygen, I wouldn't like to be anywhere near (i.e. within tens of km if not more) a site that stores thousands of tons of CO2.
CO2 has sometimes been pumped down oil wells to provide pressure to lift out more oil after the hole goes "dry" due to loss of natural gas pressure while there's still oil available.
On at least one occasion such a well has leaked, creating a large bubble of CO2 on the ground that displaced the air and caused human fatalities. (Not oil workers, either, but sleeping neighbors.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
" If the alternatives were cheap, they would be in place now."
(looks aruond the house) Um, they are.
It used to cost me $11,000/yr to run this place. I spent $5K on stuff and now my operaqting cost is zero.
No, you don't get to keep your electric dryer. Changes must be made. You will make them sooner or later, I just happen to be done now.
Pumping co2 into the ground is the dumbest idea since Bush entering politics.
Need Mercedes parts ?
The SEGs system is online now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEGS
In 2.5 square miles they produce 350 Mega-watts of power
and do it with reflective troughs and heating high temperature
oil to drive a steam turbine.
They store hot oil and get some production even after sundown,
and then switch to natural gas for a few hours til sunrise.
If the uninhabited sections of the Mojave Desert
were used for this system, it would power all of North America.
The Mojave is over 22,000 sq. miles, if 10,000 of it was used
for a SEGs type setup you would get 4,000 times the current
power production ie. 1.41 Tera-Watts rough estimate.
In 2004 it was estimated by scientists that total world
energy usage was 15 Tera-Watts for all types of energy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_resources_and_consumption
The proposed SEGs expansion would produce almost 10% of that.
We have our silver bullet, it will just be a monster to build.
North Africa could use the Sahara and power all of Africa
and Europe.
The best photovoltaic cells are 20% effective, The best Thermals
have hit 41% per wikipedia, and 60% being theoretically possible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_thermal_energy#High-temperature_collectors
Here in the US we could also use a large part of the 120,000 sq. mi.
Sonora Desert.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonora_desert
Just my 2 cents...
google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
CO2 doesn't contaminate groundwater.
Nuclear waste doesn't allow for huge amounts of enhanced oil recovery or coalbed methane recovery.
The capital costs are very high, but if used for a purpose, CO2 injection can pay for itself. CO2 injection in the US alone has the potential to recover ~100-400B barrels (restoring old, "used up" fields like the East Texas Field, plus injection into all of the large fields we're currently tapping and the ones we haven't started tapping yet). That's 10-40 trillion dollars at $100/barrel -- a couple times the size of the US GDP. There's not as much money in coalbed methane recovery, but it's still substantial.
No, she's fine. My associate is vomiting for a totally unrelated reason.